A short message on the topic of corruption. Abstract: The problem of corruption and types of fight against corruption

Russia is a country of enormous material possibilities, in which, today, according to the apt remark of one Western journalist, "the greatest sale in history" is taking place. Dividing a huge pie in the face of legal uncertainty contributes to the rapid growth of corruption. "Personal preferences, friendly sympathies, a mixture of public and private interests" (that is, everything that makes up the essence of corruption) in the course of the ongoing redistribution of public property have become widespread practice.

Today, the problem of corruption is extremely important and urgent in the political, economic, social life of both Russia and the whole world. Each of us knows what it is, and perhaps many of us have already experienced bribery in practice. The fact is that corruption exists in almost all spheres of society, it manifests itself in a wide variety of forms and types.

On the official website of the analytical bureau Transparency International (Transparency International), according to data for 2006, Russia occupies 121st place in the rating. Its indicator for 2006 was 2.5. For comparison: the level of corruption in such countries as Finland, Spain, New Zealand - 9.6; Germany - 8; USA - 7.3; China, Egypt - 3.3. Transparency International experts note that corruption remains a characteristic feature of Russia and the situation is getting worse.

This means that our country is one of the most corrupt countries in the world, and its "successes" in this are significantly ahead of the achievements of the national economy.

Corruption destroys a democratic society, hinders the development of business, both small and medium, and large. From the hands of officials, "authorized" commercial structures receive permission to engage in activities that bring huge profits, i.e. get the privilege of being rich. In turn, they pay government officials a new type of bribe that is virtually undiscovered during an investigation.

Corruption is a very complex political and social phenomenon, in which cause and effect are often intertwined, and it often becomes difficult to determine whether this or that manifestation of corruption is a consequence of the old, or is it a manifestation of something new.

Is the Russian situation unique?

On the one hand, no. All countries undergoing social transformation have faced, to a greater or lesser extent, the problems of the lack of effective political and legal control, a clear concept of administration, which has led to an increase in corruption. Insufficient control or the absence of the ability to apply sanctions everywhere encourages nomenklatura workers and officials to abuse power. On the other hand, the objective difficulties and numerous miscalculations in the implementation of economic reforms in Russia have seriously complicated the situation in our country in comparison with a number of countries with economies in transition in Central and Eastern Europe. For a number of reasons, Russian society has become rent-oriented, completely dependent on the decisions of corrupt officials.

The question is often raised in the literature: has corruption become more widespread in modern Russia, if compared with the level of the 80s of the former USSR? It seems to me that attempts to give quantitative estimates explain little. We should talk not only and not so much about the scale of this phenomenon, but about the qualitative changes in corruption at the present stage. They can be traced in several directions: goals, subject, participants in corrupt relations; the position of an employee in the public administration system, the main motives of his behavior.

As you know, the most characteristic feature of a centralized economy is an all-encompassing deficit. It permeates all stages of the reproductive process - the actual production, distribution, exchange and consumption. The development of corruption in these conditions is possible due to the fact that a government official who redistributes a tangible product can do this in the interests of certain business entities, while receiving personal benefit. Personal gain can take the form of money, more often scarce goods or services. As a rule, an official has a non-universal object of shortage and therefore is forced to exchange it for the same non-universal services he needs, becoming at the same time a person who provides someone with personal benefit and receives it due to the emerging corrupt relations. The main function of government officials is the organization of large-scale "shadow barter".

On the basis of corrupt transactions, a significant part of both production factors and personal consumption items is distributed. The scale of corruption is great, but there are natural limits to its spread, mainly related to the position of an official in the state apparatus. The structure of the latter is slender and highly hierarchical. Each rung of this hierarchical ladder presupposes the provision of a certain set of benefits and privileges to the official (special rations, free rest, state machine, etc.). Moving up this ladder, which ensures the growth of the volume of privileges, becomes the main incentive for the activity of the bureaucrat. The presence of strict party-state control forces the official to weigh the risk of participating in corrupt deals.

In modern Russia, personal consumption is removed from the sphere of corrupt relations, many factors of production cease to be the subject of a corrupt transaction. The sphere of development of corruption is narrowing within the framework of the reproduction process, but the scale is increasing. Money becomes a deficit, and the subject of corrupt bargaining is the possibility of obtaining super-profits.

Among the main sources of enrichment are the misuse of state budget funds (soft loans, tax exemptions, subsidized imports), export quotas and privatization. These methods of enrichment, which appeared in the second half of the 1980s in connection with the partial deregulation of the socialist-type economy, since 1991, have assumed unprecedented proportions. Thus, the cost of soft loans to industrial enterprises in 1992 reached 30%, and the total amount of import subsidies - 15% of GDP. What, for example, were import subsidies?

Due to the general fear of famine in the winter of 1991, the state provided large import subsidies in 1992. Importers paid only 1% of the current exchange rate when buying foreign currency from the government for food imports, and the government financed this subsidy with Western commodity loans. However, imported products were sold in Russia at normal market prices, and this subsidy benefited a small number, mainly Moscow merchants.

Opportunities to participate in the export of oil, natural gas, metals and other raw materials, in view of the huge difference between domestic prices and world market prices that existed at the initial stage, also provided huge super-profits in Russia for well-connected people - officials of manufacturing companies, corrupt

officials. Their income in 1992 amounted to 30% of GDP , according to Anders Åslund, adviser to the Russian government in those years.

Features of the modern system of public administration radically change the position of an official. His position is extremely unstable due to the constant war between the clans. The instability of the situation, low wages ($300-400 for high-level officials), not supported by a system of clearly defined privileges, the absence of any form of effective control by society, the scale of multibillion-dollar transactions passing through the hands of an official make him easily bought. For a huge number of officials, a bribe becomes the only incentive for activity.

1. History and basic concept of corruption

As a kind of deviant political behavior, political corruption has been known since ancient times. Perhaps the first to use the term "corruption" in relation to politics was Aristotle, who defined tyranny as a corrupt (wrong, "spoiled") form of monarchy. Machiavelli, Rycco and many other thinkers of the past wrote about it. In the XX century. due to the growth of the scale of political corruption, this problem has acquired a special significance.

Political corruption is based on the informal, uncontrolled exchange of resources between power elites and other structures of society. The following main types of state resources are at the disposal of the ruling elite: symbolic (national anthem, flag, coat of arms and other signs of state symbols); power-administrative and material (control over the state economy, tax policy, etc.).

Not all types of political corruption are defined by law as criminal acts. It is a socially condemned behavior of those in power, which may or may not include a criminal act.

In the Soviet Union, the fight against bribes was very successful, from the very beginning of the Bolsheviks coming to power, the attitude towards bribery among the people has deteriorated sharply due to the competent policy of the rulers. However, gradually the situation nevertheless began to deteriorate, and in the post-war years, during perestroika and after it, the growth of corruption took place against the background of the weakening of the state machine.

Thus, the current state of corruption in Russia is largely due to long-standing trends and a transitional stage, which in other countries in a similar situation was accompanied by an increase in corruption.

In a broad sense, corruption is the direct use by an official of the rights associated with his position for the purpose of personal enrichment; venality, bribery of officials, politicians. In a narrower sense, corruption is usually understood as a situation where an official makes an illegal decision from which some other party benefits (for example, a firm that receives a state order contrary to the established procedure), and the official himself receives illegal remuneration from this party .

A typical situation is when an official who is obliged by law to make a certain decision in relation to a certain person (for example, to issue a license for some type of business), creates artificial illegal barriers for this, which forces his client to pay a bribe, which, as a rule, , and happens. This situation corresponds to the traditional concept of corruption, because it involves giving and accepting bribes.

2. Forms of corruption in Russia

Throughout history, bribery has traditionally existed in several forms, initially it was bribes received for lawful acts, or for illegal ones. Then other gradations and forms of corruption began to appear.

In our time, the most characteristic and widespread forms of manifestation of corruption are bribery, bribery of state and public and political figures, officials, illegal protectionism, etc. Favorable ground for corruption is the nationalization of public life, the bureaucratization of society and the state, excessive centralization of management, the prosperity of the shadow economy, rejection of real democracy, etc. Corruption acquires especially wide scale in crisis situations, during periods of decomposition of socio-political regimes, the decline of public morals, as well as during abrupt changes in politics, during the strengthening of the fight against bribery.

There are several forms of corruption: grassroots (petty, everyday); summit (large, elite). The most common and most dangerous is corruption in power structures, corruption associated with the use of administrative resources (political corruption, which can act both in the form of grassroots corruption - a bribe for registering an enterprise, and in the form of top corruption - the use of administrative resources to obtain the "desired" election result ). In addition to the inefficient use of material and financial resources, political corruption leads to the discrediting of democratic values, to an increase in distrust in the authorities.

2.1 Elite corruption

Elite corruption, or, as it is often called, big or pinnacle corruption is a huge threat, a huge threat to the state. Corruption permeates the entire vertical of executive power. Practically in all spheres of state activity where financial or other material resources are distributed, officials abuse their official position.

Elite corruption is characterized by the following features: high social position of the subjects of its commission; sophisticated intellectual ways of their actions; huge material, physical and moral damage; exceptional latency of encroachments; condescending and even careful attitude of the authorities towards this group of criminals.

The main difference between elite corruption and grassroots corruption is the consequences of this act, that is, when an illegal transfer of money occurs in the highest echelons of power, this affects the whole country and hits all the people of the state, since the decisions made after giving a bribe are always very large-scale and great. On the other hand, this does not happen in grassroots corruption - giving a bribe to a traffic police officer does not lead to large-scale consequences, although, of course, quantity turns into quality.

We are talking about corruption if the same treatment is not applied to the persons participating in the competition, and preferential conditions are created for one participant, or the public procurement is not carried out, although it should be done.

Of course, the fact that such frauds are taking place in our country makes one wonder how great the scale of corruption is at all levels of power. This story speaks of the absolute impunity of people who give and accept bribes.

Another form of elitist corruption is lobbying, or financing of parties by private individuals who receive useful political decisions as compensation (for example, changing laws to make it easier for supporters to conduct business). It is difficult to give any concrete examples here, because, again, corrupt officials are not punished. This form of bribery is widely used in our country, both in the State Duma and in the Council of Federations. Otherwise it would not be accepted

the number of laws, which are then called meaningless and unnecessary. Of course, all these laws actually play into the hands of certain people.

Despite the fact that in Russia, and in other countries, people serving in the government do not have the right to do business, commerce, nevertheless, such cases are very common in practice. It will be profitable for any deputy to do business when he can overcome all bureaucratic obstacles, and even write a law especially for himself.

During the election of parties and the president, the level of political corruption increases sharply, the stakes are very high here, because we are talking about power, therefore both the amounts and the scale of bribery are colossal. A deputy has a huge number of opportunities to increase his popularity among voters, and almost always a bribe is an essential condition for victory, and sometimes even for participation. Giving a bribe provides the candidate with unequal access to the media, pressure on election commissions, on internal affairs bodies, and on business structures.

This form of corruption can be called vote buying. Vote buying occurs during elections, when candidates promise favors, gifts, etc. to those who voted for them. Vote buying should not be confused with campaign giveaways that do not directly oblige the voter to vote for the candidate.

So, elite corruption has many different forms, types, manifestations, it is not as widespread and not as ubiquitous as grassroots corruption, but nevertheless, any manifestation of top corruption entails many troubles, many problems, threatens the stability of the national economy. In addition, it is important that such manifestations of corruption greatly undermine the authority of the state among citizens, they cease to trust their rulers, therefore, they lose interest in politics, because they believe that absolutely nothing depends on them, that elections are bought, medicines are bought too much. expensive, laws are not passed in the interests of society, but in the interests of individuals and groups of people.

It’s even hard for me to imagine how this kind of corruption can be fought, because when even those people who should help us, who should fight against corruption, themselves take bribes everywhere - how can they write a law that can eliminate their bribes, and eliminate them themselves in this way. If ministers take bribes, if President Yeltsin had an account of about $50 million in a foreign bank by the end of his reign, what can we talk about, with whom can we argue, and where, in whom can we see help?

2.2 Grassroots corruption

Grassroots corruption has a number of significant differences from top corruption: it is, as a rule, bureaucratic rather than political corruption, in addition, it does not affect other subjects, that is, only two persons are involved in a bribe, and the consequences may also affect these people. The consequences are often insignificant in the short term.

Sociological studies showing that 98% of motorists at least once in their lives gave a bribe to a traffic police inspector, speak not only of the high degree of corruption in this service. The data testify to the widest corruption of public consciousness, to the fact that grassroots corruption has been introduced into public practice.

The attractiveness of grassroots corruption is that, with minimal risk for both parties, it has a specific value not only for the recipient (or extortionist) of the bribe, but also for the bribe giver. A bribe helps to solve constantly arising domestic problems; it also serves as a small price to pay for the constant possibility of minor violations of laws and regulations. Large-scale grassroots corruption is extremely dangerous because, firstly, it creates a favorable psychological background for the existence of other forms of corruption and, secondly, it nurtures vertical corruption. The latter is the source material for the formation of organized corruption structures and communities.

Grassroots corruption in Russia occurs almost everywhere where an ordinary citizen is faced with the need to turn to the state, or, conversely, the state considers it appropriate to disturb a citizen.

There are several basic forms of grassroots corruption, and by far the most common, well-known, ubiquitous, simplest and most understandable of them is a bribe or offering.

A bribe is considered both monetary and other benefits (gifts, study trips, benefits, etc.) that an official receives for violating his official duties. The difference between an offering and a bribe is that in the case of an offering, the official who received the favor does (or does not do) an act that is permitted by law, while in the case of a bribe, he commits an illegal act. A bribe / offering is given both in order to speed up certain processes, and in order to obtain information, a service that would otherwise remain

inaccessible, or in order to prevent the consequences of an act (for example, loss of rights).

Of course, this can also include the banal giving of a bribe to a traffic police officer, or a police officer, or giving a bribe to quickly obtain a certificate, receipt, and more serious bribes - when entering a university, when deferring from the army. In my opinion, although this form of bribery is not a terrible evil, it still contains a certain threat: a person gets used to bribery, which means that if he was able to give 100 rubles, then later he will be able to make a larger offering. Of course, not only, but not entirely citizens are to blame here, the system that allows such a situation is to blame here.

Grassroots corruption can manifest itself in the following areas of people's lives and commercial activities: first of all, this is the housing and communal sector, as sociological surveys of the Russian population show, they are perceived as the most corrupt. It would seem that the emergence of a housing market should lead to a decrease in corruption in this area. However, its rootedness here is extremely strong. This is a prime example of how measures alone to eliminate the economic conditions of corruption may not be enough to combat it.

Law enforcement agencies, and especially the police, are in second place. Recently, among those held accountable for corruption, one quarter are employees of law enforcement agencies. As already mentioned, the most significant contribution to this high result is made by the traffic police. In addition to roads, citizens often engage in corrupt relationships with law enforcement agencies in the issuance of driver's licenses, permits to keep firearms, and in other similar cases.

In addition to all of the above, this can also include such a form of grassroots corruption as nepotism, that is, corrupt actions associated with the admission of relatives or in-laws to senior positions in large firms. This also includes a more serious type of corruption - money laundering, in which huge amounts are transferred to the accounts of foreign banks in order to hide from taxes, in order to cover up the traces of crimes. Money laundering, it would seem, is not directly related to corruption, however, if you think about it, it becomes clear that money obtained illegally (otherwise, why “launder” it?) is always associated with bribes.

Another, very important, often absolutely closed for examination, is such a form of bribe as "kickback". The point is that here

bribery occurs without the participation of any state bodies, between employees of firms. For example, a firm, or rather a member of this organization participating in a transaction, is ready to pay a partner for a product more money than required, while part of the income will go to the supplier of the goods, and the other part to the party - the buyer. Neither side actually loses, everyone remains in the "plus", and there is simply no need to talk about this to the leadership or the state.

I must say that despite the much more modest amounts of bribes in bureaucratic corruption, people who give them are held accountable much more often. So, you can name a lot of small cases, when for a bribe on the road of 50-1000 rubles, people had to bear, though well-deserved, but unjustified punishment. The story of a motorist that happened a few years ago is very famous; a man was sentenced to several years in prison for giving a bribe on the road, while thousands of law enforcement officers remain completely unpunished.

At the present stage, the most important thing is that people are gradually beginning to understand that the problem can be solved not only with the help of a bribe. That is, now the main task of society is that you just need to stop giving bribes. Theoretically, this is quite possible. Of course, corruption is a very large-scale phenomenon, and it will take many years to eradicate it, but consciousness must constantly change for the better.

3. Consequences of corruption

Corruption in Russia, and not only in Russia, permeates all layers of society: authorities, entrepreneurs, public organizations, thereby bearing negative consequences for both society and the state as a whole.

Corruption has given rise to a massive increase in organized crime. According to the estimates of the Russian Interior Ministry, organized crime controls almost half of private firms, every third state-owned enterprise, from 50 to 85 percent of banks. Virtually no sector of the economy is immune from its impact.

Corruption leads to the most serious consequences during the electoral and budgetary processes. Political corruption begins with elections, corruption during elections leads to distrust of the authorities (both elected and hired, who follow the example of people's deputies) and to discredit the institution of elections as a general democratic value. Corruption in the budget process leads both to the theft of budget money and to the loss of the country's attractiveness for domestic and foreign investors.

As for the social sphere, here the results of corruption can be called: the growth of property inequality, because corruption spurs unfair and unjust redistribution of funds in favor of narrow oligarchic groups at the expense of the most vulnerable sections of society and an increase in social tension in society, hitting the economy and threatening political stability in the country.

4. Fight against corruption

The means of combating corruption are mainly divided into two types - preventive or soft methods, and reactionary or hard methods. Soft methods include, for example, training, personal policy (eg rotation) and organizational and cultural development, as well as certain control mechanisms. Harsh methods include laws and punishments. Various methods are used in the struggle of different states against corruption. Thus, for this purpose, television and radio programs, social campaigns, training courses, information for the public, legal acts, corruption studies, information booklets, supplements to laws, etc. have been developed. In most Western European countries, laws that regulate anti-corruption activities are very similar. parts. One of the biggest fighters for punishing corrupt acts and imposing equivalent punishments for them is the anti-bribery working group. Their purpose is to ensure that a bribe-taker does not go unpunished in one state if the penalties in a neighboring state are very severe. They are also trying to ensure that similar requirements apply for officials in all allied states.

There is no clear position on which of the methods of combating corruption is the most effective. The same methods do not have to be suitable for different cultures. At the same time, it is well known that the freedom of the media, the availability of necessary information, etc. are prerequisites for reducing corruption.

It should be noted that there are several models of corruption in the state, these are Asian, African, Latin American models. Clearly, Russia does not yet fall under either of the models described above, or any combination of them. This means that corruption in Russia has not yet become systemic. The chance has not been lost yet.

Russia's problem in the fight against corruption may lie in the fact that we are fighting not with the causes of bribery, but with its consequences, trying to patch this or that hole in the legislation and in society. We do not look at the root of the problem, we do not solve the problem systematically, totally, everywhere, although only such an approach could bring us benefits, benefits and results. What do we need to do to eliminate this evil. Perhaps the will of the government is needed, which has not yet been observed.

As organizational measures - the creation of specific structures, the exclusion of their departmental and administrative-territorial fragmentation, the provision of powerful legal protection for law enforcement officials, material equipment, taking into account the latest achievements of science and technology.

In order to improve the operational-investigative and criminal procedural legislation in order to increase the effectiveness of the fight against corruption in the law-making process, it is necessary to take into account a number of provisions of fundamental importance. First, unreasonable restrictions on the rights and freedoms of citizens, and even more so their violation, cannot be allowed. Secondly, legal regulation should be systemic and cover the phenomenon under consideration in general. Thirdly, the state and society must be ready to consciously incur significant material costs in the fight against corruption.

Legislation aimed at preventing corruption as a criminal phenomenon should be based not only on fixing increasingly stringent liability measures, but first of all on a clear limitation and impossibility of state authorities and their employees to carry out or have any relation to any economic activity. I mean precisely economic, and not specifically entrepreneurial activity, since any relation to economic activity gives rise to the temptation of an official to use his position for "commercial" purposes.

Powerful state and commercial activities for the provision of services and profit-making cannot be combined in one person, should not be carried out by one organization. Even with maximum control and no obvious abuse, this combination of two different activities deforms each of them. At present, it is clearly seen that engaging in both economic activity and the implementation of public administration functions serves as a provoking factor, creating favorable conditions for the abuse of power and the penetration of corruption into the state apparatus. The body of state power, exercising the function assigned to it, should be guided only by the state interests. No other interests or motives should influence this activity.

Thus, in order to prevent corruption in the system of public authorities, legislation should be guided by two fundamental rules:

1) state bodies and local self-government bodies should not receive income or derive other benefits for themselves from the exercise of power;

2) they also should not carry out, along with powers of authority, any other activity aimed at extracting income for themselves or obtaining other benefits.

The first normative act designed to regulate the fight against corruption in Russia was the Decree of the President of April 4, 1992 N 361 "On the fight against corruption in the system of public service bodies"

This decree, before the adoption of the "Law on Civil Service in the Russian Federation" and before the adoption of other regulations designed to regulate the fight against corruption, despite its small volume, established the basic principles for protecting the activities of state officials from corruption.

engage in entrepreneurial activities;

provide any assistance not provided for by law to individuals and legal entities using their official position;

perform other paid work (except for scientific, teaching and creative activities);

be a member of economic societies and partnerships.

2. Establishment for civil servants of the mandatory submission of a declaration on income, movable and immovable property, deposits in banks and securities.

Violation of these requirements entails dismissal from the position held and other liability in accordance with applicable law.

The Decree of the President of Russia "On Combating Corruption in the Public Service System, despite its timeliness and importance, is not without known defects (narrowness of the range of issues to be resolved, insufficient elaboration in terms of legal technique, etc.). The absence of a well-developed mechanism for implementing the Decree and monitoring its implementation creates serious obstacles to the effective application of both the decree itself and the entire meager anti-corruption legislation.

The Law on Corruption has not yet been adopted, the draft of which was rejected several times by the President. It is in this law that a definition of a qualitatively new offense is given - an offense related to corruption.

So, an offense related to corruption is an unlawful act committed by a person who ensures the execution of the powers of a state body or the powers of a local self-government body, or by a person equated to him, which consists in illegally obtaining material benefits and advantages using his official position or the status of a body (institution ), in which it replaces a public position of the Russian Federation, a public position of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, an elected municipal position, a position of a state or municipal service, or the status of other bodies (institutions).

The difficulty that the State Duma faces in adopting this legislative act is quite understandable. Despite the severity of this problem in Russia, not a single law in Russia, except for the Criminal Code, can establish the criminality of an act, in other words, not a single normative act can determine which acts are considered criminal and which are not. The same can be said about property liability, which is intended to be regulated by the civil code. Some norms established by the Law are at odds with that huge mass of laws and other normative acts, which at the moment constitutes the existing system of law. Unfortunately, the norms of the Law that allow regulating the fight against corruption more or less adequately at the present time inevitably run counter to and contradict the existing legislation, and, therefore, if the Law is adopted, destabilize the system of law already torn apart by various interests. First of all, it is necessary to check all laws for corruption capacity, that is, whether this law can be used to receive a bribe. Here, for sure, many lobbies - laws will come up.

It is wrong to believe that the judiciary is to blame for this problem. Many believe that it is impossible to win a case against a major official. Statistics show that 68% of complaints against state bodies and officials are satisfied by the judicial system. However, in general, lawsuits are filed by owners of medium and large businesses, where the administrative system has already been established and worked out.

To date, there are 3 anti-corruption strategies:

1. Public awareness of the dangers of corruption and its consequences

2. Prevention and prevention of corruption

3. Rule of law and protection of citizens' rights.

There are foundations without which corruption cannot be defeated. First, in the absence of independent mass media, it is pointless to fight against it, because no corrupt government without external public control will be able to remake itself. The media should constantly heat up this problem, keep it in sight, show that the state is fighting corruption, thanks to this there will be a slow, gradual education in this area, young people will realize that bribery in Russia is stopped in the bud, and the level of corruption will gradually begin to fall .

If you suppress the independent press and at the same time proclaim a policy of purity in your ranks, you are deceiving the voters. The second basis is the transparency of power. Power must be open, if society is not aware of the decision-making mechanisms, this increases the level of corruption. And the third indispensable condition is fair political competition in the elections. If the government destroys fair political competition, then it is again subject to corruption.

Conclusion

In order for the level of corruption in our country to begin to decrease at least in small steps, we must act systematically and progressively.

· Give complete freedom of the press to other media conducting their own independent investigations.

· It is necessary to create various structures of control over the work of officials.

· Constantly improve legislation that can keep pace with the emergence of new types of offenses.

· Use a transparent banking system to pay fines and other monetary settlements.

· Do not make exceptions for anyone and impose penalties on people of any social level.

· To increase the material and social security of officials.

· Incriminate state officials in bribery - the entire population must understand that it is necessary to start by stopping giving bribes, that making profit and increasing income in the short term will result in a significant deterioration in the economic development of our country in the long term.

Bibliography

1. Kardapolova T.F., Rudenkin V.N. Political science. Training and metodology complex. Yekaterinburg UIEUIP. 2006

2. Kataev N.A. Serdyuk L.V. Corruption Ufa 1995

3. A.S. Dementiev. The state and problems of organizing the fight against corruption. Corruption and Russia: state and problems. M., Ministry of Internal Affairs, Moscow in-t. 1996, V.1, p.25.

4. Corruption: political, economic, organizational and legal problems. Ed. Luneva V.V. M., Jurist 2001

5. Citizen Valery. Corruption: will the Russians overcome it? // "Power" 12'2004

6. Zamyatina T. Russia and corruption: who wins? Echo of the Planet, 2002, No. 50

7. Satarov G.A. Warmth of sincere relations: something about corruption Social Sciences and Modernity, 2002, No. 6

8. Simoniya N. Peculiarities of national corruption // Svobodnaya thought - XXI, 2001, No. 7

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE, YOUTH AND SPORT OF UKRAINE
SEVASTOPOL NATIONAL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY
Faculty of Economics and Management
Department of Economic Theory

ABSTRACT

On the topic of:
CORRUPTION: CONCEPT, ASSESSMENT, WAYS TO FIGHT
in the discipline "Institutional Economics"

Completed by: student of the EP-31d group
Matvienko M.V. ______________________
________ "__" _______20__
Scientific adviser: senior lecturer
Drebot A.M. _____________________
_________ "__"______20__

Sevastopol

Introduction……………………………………………………………….……………………3

The concept and assessment of corruption……………………………………….…………. ..4
Causes and consequences………………………………………………. …………6
Corruption in Ukraine. Ways of struggle………………………………………...…………………………11

INTRODUCTION

The problem of corruption and bribery in Ukraine has become so threateningly acute that the motives and relevance of the chosen topic are simply obvious. Everything is bought and sold: from grades at school to the adoption of a law in the Verkhovna Rada. Now countering corruption is one of the main tasks of the Ukrainian state in the short and medium term. The theoretical significance of this study is the analysis of lawmaking and law enforcement, the state and degree of corruption in society, the display of various sources of views on this topic, their comparative characteristics. The purpose of the study is to reflect the shortcomings and gaps in the legislation, evidence of this is the fact that the state strategy to counter this large-scale phenomenon has not yet been developed, a number of the most important anti-corruption laws and other socially significant documents have not been adopted, and the measures that are being tried today to its impact, are estimated by professionals to a greater extent as an imitation of state activity, since they are initially ineffective. The objectives of the study are to improve the fight against criminal manifestations of corruption. The object of the research is the problem of combating corruption and bribery in Ukraine. The subject of the study is the general patterns of the emergence, functioning and development of corruption relations (as a way of implementing the plans of criminal communities), their essence, causes, and consequences.

CONCEPT AND ASSESSMENT OF CORRUPTION

Like any complex social phenomenon, corruption does not have a single canonical definition. It is clear that sociologists, management specialists, economists, lawyers and ordinary citizens interpret this concept in different ways.
The most interesting is the definition of "corruption" made by N. Machiaveli - the use of public opportunities in private interests.
The definitions of corrumpire in Roman law were understood in the most general way as (break), spoil, destroy, damage, falsify, bribe and denoted an illegal act, for example, against a judge. This concept comes from a combination of the Latin words "correi" - several participants in one of the parties of the obligation regarding a single subject and "rumpere" - to break, damage, violate, cancel. As a result, an independent term was formed, which assumed the participation in the activities of several (at least two) persons, the purpose of which is to “spoil”, “damage” the normal course of the judicial process or the process of managing the affairs of the company.
The further development of this concept in legal science narrows the scope of its designation and was defined as the corruption of official actions (bribery).
International public normative documents understand corruption in different ways. Some definitions cover doing or not taking any action in the performance of, or in connection with those duties, as a result of gifts, promises or inducements requested or accepted or received illegally whenever such action or omission takes place. However, it is emphasized that the concept of corruption must be defined in accordance with national law.
In the UN documents on the international fight against corruption, there is also a definition of "corruption" - this is the abuse of state power for personal gain. It shows that corruption goes beyond bribery. This concept includes bribery (giving a reward to seduce a person from a position of duty), nepotism (protection based on personal connections) and misappropriation of public funds for private use.
The Working Definition of the Interdisciplinary Group on Corruption of the Council of Europe has given an even broader definition: corruption is bribery and any other behavior of persons entrusted with the performance of certain duties in the public or private sector and which leads to a violation of the duties assigned to them by the status of a public official, private employee, independent agent or other relationship and is intended to obtain any illegal benefit for yourself and others. In this case, not only an official can be the subject of corrupt acts.
A similar idea is laid down in the Guide prepared by the UN secretariat based on the experience of different countries. It includes in the concept of corruption:

theft, embezzlement and appropriation of state property by officials
abuse of official position to obtain unjustified personal benefits (benefits, advantages) as a result of unofficial use of official status
conflict of interest between public duty and personal self-interest.

CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF CORRUPTION

As stated, corruption is a complex and diverse phenomenon. Therefore, the set of possible causes of corruption is also diverse. Its scope, specificity and dynamics are a consequence of the country's general political, social and economic problems. The relationship between corruption and the problems that generate it is two-way. On the one hand, these problems exacerbate corruption, and their solution can help reduce corruption. On the other hand, large-scale corruption conserves and exacerbates the problems of the transition period, hinders their solution. It follows from this that, firstly, it is possible to reduce and limit corruption only by simultaneously solving the problems that generate it; and, secondly, the solution of these problems will contribute to the fight against corruption with all determination and in all directions.
The common problems that generate corruption include those that are characteristic of most countries that are in the process of modernization, primarily those that are in transition from a centralized to a market economy. Here are some of these problems:
1) the difficulties of overcoming the legacy of the totalitarian period. These include, first of all, a slow departure from the closeness and lack of control of the authorities, which, of course, contributed to the flourishing of corruption. Another circumstance is overcoming the merging of power and the economy, which is characteristic of totalitarian regimes with a centralized system of economic management. The natural division of labor between the institutions of power, designed to create conditions for the normal functioning of the economy, and the free agents of the market has not yet been formed;
2) economic decline and political instability. The impoverishment of the population, the inability of the state to provide civil servants with a decent salary push both of them to violations, leading to massive grassroots corruption. This is reinforced by the old Soviet traditions of blat. At the same time, the constantly perceived political risk of long-term investments, difficult economic circumstances (inflation, the clumsy and inappropriate presence of the state in the economy, the lack of clear regulatory mechanisms) form a certain type of economic behavior designed for the short term, large, albeit risky profits. This type of behavior is very close to seeking profit through corruption;
Political instability creates a sense of insecurity among officials at various levels. Having no guarantees of self-preservation under these conditions, they also more easily succumb to the temptation of corruption;
3) underdevelopment and imperfection of legislation. In the process of transformation, the renewal of the fundamental foundations of the economy and economic practice significantly overtakes their legislative support. Suffice it to recall that in the countries of the former USSR, privatization (its party-nomenklatura stage) took place without clear legislative regulation and strict control. If earlier, under the Soviet regime, corruption was often generated by control over the distribution of the main resource - funds, then at the initial stages of the reform, officials sharply diversified the areas of control: benefits, loans, licenses, privatization tenders, the right to be an authorized bank, the right to implement large social projects, etc. .P. Economic liberalization was combined, firstly, with the old principles of bureaucratic control over resources, and secondly, with the absence of a legislative
regulation of new areas of activity. This is one of the signs of the transitional period and at the same time serves as the most fertile ground for corruption.
There is still considerable legislative uncertainty regarding property issues. First of all, this concerns land ownership, the illegal sale of which gives rise to an abundant flow of corruption.
Defects in legislation are manifested in the imperfection of the entire legal system, in the vagueness of legislative procedures, in the presence of norms that create additional opportunities for corruption;
4) Inefficiency of government institutions. Totalitarian regimes build a cumbersome state apparatus. Bureaucratic structures are resilient and adapt well to surviving the most severe shocks. Moreover, the more energetic the transformations, the more energy and ingenuity the apparatus spends on its own preservation. As a result, the surrounding life is rapidly changing, and bureaucratic institutions and, consequently, the management system lag behind these changes.
The bottom line is simple: the more complex and clumsy the system of government, the greater the discrepancy between it and the problems that it must solve, the easier it is for corruption to nestle in it;
5) the weakness of civil society, the separation of society from power. A democratic state is able to solve problems only in cooperation with the institutions of civil society. The deterioration of the socio-economic situation of citizens, which always accompanies the initial stages of modernization, the disappointment caused by this, which replaces former hopes - all this contributes to the alienation of society from power, the isolation of the latter;
6) unrooted democratic political traditions. The penetration of corruption into politics is facilitated by:
- unformed political culture, which is reflected, in particular, in the election process, when voters give their votes for cheap handouts or succumbing to deliberate demagoguery;
- underdevelopment of the party system, when the parties are not able to take responsibility for the training and promotion of their personnel and programs;
- the imperfection of the legislation, which excessively protects the status of a deputy, does not ensure the real dependence of elected persons on voters, and provokes violations in the financing of election campaigns.
Thus, the subsequent corruption of representative bodies of power is laid down at the stage of elections.
Real political competition serves as a counterbalance and limiter for corruption in the political sphere, on the one hand, and for political extremism, on the other. As a result, the chances of political instability are reduced.
Fictitious political life, the lack of opportunities for the political opposition to influence the situation responsibly, push opposition politicians to exchange political capital for economic capital. At the same time, taking into account other conditions, a smooth transition is being made from semi-legitimate lobbying to outright corruption.
Corruption has a negative impact on all spheres of public life, in particular on the economy, politics, management, social and legal spheres, public consciousness and international relations. In this regard, the consequences of the impact of corruption on society can be classified depending on the areas of occurrence, into: social, economic, government, political, legal, international and moral and psychological.
1) Economic consequences:
- The shadow economy is expanding. This leads to a decrease in tax revenues and a weakening of the budget. As a result, the state loses the financial levers of managing the economy, social problems are exacerbated due to non-fulfillment of budget obligations;
- the competitive mechanisms of the market are violated, since often the winner is not the one who is competitive, but the one who could illegally gain advantages. This entails a decrease in the efficiency of the market and the discrediting of the ideas of market competition;
- the emergence of effective private owners is slowing down, primarily due to violations during privatization, as well as artificial bankruptcies, usually associated with bribing officials. The consequences are the same as in paragraph 2 of this list;
- budget funds are used inefficiently, in particular, in the distribution of government orders and loans. This further exacerbates the country's budgetary problems;
- Prices rise due to corrupt "overhead costs". As a result, the consumer suffers;
- market agents have a lack of confidence in the ability of the authorities to establish, control and comply with fair rules of the market game. The investment climate is deteriorating, and, consequently, the problems of overcoming the decline in production and renewal of fixed assets are not being solved;
- scales of corruption in non-governmental organizations (at firms, enterprises, in public organizations) are expanding. This leads to a decrease in the efficiency of their work, which means that the efficiency of the country's economy as a whole decreases.
2) Social consequences:
- Colossal funds are diverted from the goals of social development. This aggravates the budget crisis, reduces the ability of the authorities to solve social problems.
- sharp property inequality and poverty of a large part of the population are fixed and increasing. Corruption encourages an unfair redistribution of funds in favor of narrow groups at the expense of the most vulnerable segments of the population.
- law is discredited as the main instrument for regulating the life of the state and society. In the public mind, an idea is being formed about the defenselessness of citizens both in the face of crime and in the face of power.
- Corruption of law enforcement agencies contributes to the strengthening of organized crime. The latter, merging with corrupt groups of officials and entrepreneurs, is further strengthened by access to political power and opportunities for money laundering.
- social tension is increasing, hitting the economy and threatening political stability in the country.
3) Political implications:
- there is a shift in policy goals from national development to ensuring the rule of certain clans.
- confidence in the government is decreasing, its alienation from society is growing. Thus, any good undertakings of the authorities are jeopardized.
- the prestige of the country in the international arena is falling, the threat of its economic and political isolation is growing.
- political competition is profaned and reduced. Citizens become disillusioned with the values ​​of democracy. There is a disintegration of democratic institutions.
- the risk of the collapse of the emerging democracy increases according to the common scenario of the arrival of a dictatorship on the wave of the fight against corruption.
There is no doubt that corruption has a corrupting effect on all aspects of life. It should be emphasized that the economic losses from corruption are much broader and deeper than just the total amount of bribes - the price paid by individuals or firms to corrupt officials and politicians.

CORRUPTION IN UKRAINE. WAYS TO FIGHT

Corruption in Ukraine has become one of the threats to national security. In fact, two subsystems function in society - official and unofficial, practically equal in their influence. Society and the state as a whole are negatively affected by corruption. It undermines the economic foundations of the state, blocks the inflow of foreign investment, and provokes distrust of the population in power structures. Corruption has a negative impact on the international image of Ukraine, leads to the "shadowing" of the economy, and contributes to the growth of the influence of organized criminal groups.
To date, an extremely high level of corruption has been recorded in Ukraine, which is recognized not only by domestic and foreign analysts, experts, public and international organizations, but even by domestic representatives of the highest legislative and executive authorities.
Let's take a look at some numbers. According to the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) developed by Transparency International, Ukraine ranks 134th in 2010, which it shares between Togo and Zimbabwe.
in 1998, 2.8 points (70th out of 85 countries);
in 1999, 2.6 points (77th out of 99 countries);
in 2000, 1.5 points (88 out of 90 countries);
in 2001, 2.1 points (83 out of 91 countries of the world);
in 2002, 2.4 points (86 out of 102 countries of the world);
in 2003, 2.3 points (111 out of 133 countries of the world);
in 2004, 2.2 points (128 out of 146 countries of the world);
in 2005, 2.6 points (107 out of 158 countries of the world);
in 2006 2.8 points (99th place out of 163 countries of the world);
in 2007, 2.7 points (118 out of 180 countries);
in 2008, 2.5 points (134 out of 180 countries);
in 2009, 2.2 points (146 out of 180 countries);
in 2010, 2.4 points (134 out of 178 countries).
The concept of overcoming corruption in Ukraine "On the Path to Integrity" (2006) notes that over the years of reforms, "corruption has acquired signs of a systemic phenomenon through the defeat of vital institutions of society and has become a functionally important way of their existence", began to pose a significant threat to democracy , implementation of the principle of the rule of law, social progress, national security, the development of civil society. Although over the following years since the approval of this concept by the state, a number of significant steps have been taken to develop procedures to counteract corruption at the legislative and practical levels, however, systemic reforms, the implementation of which would significantly affect the change in social relations, and then would reduce the institutional factors of corruption , there was no beginning. This is evidenced by the results of the implementation of the project "Combating corruption as one of the priorities of state policy in Ukraine: discrepancies between words and actions", which was carried out by specialists from the Center for Public Expertise. As part of this project, an audit of the entire array of legal acts that determine the state policy in the field of overcoming corruption was carried out, and the main statistical indicators on the fight against corruption in Ukraine in 2009 were analyzed. This made it possible to identify 5 main factors that characterize the current state of the fight against corruption in Ukraine. Thus, during the year in Ukraine, from 3 to 7.5 thousand administrative protocols on corruption offenses are drawn up; bribery averages 0.3-0.5% of the total number of crimes registered in Ukraine: despite the usually high level of corruption in the judiciary in Ukraine, only three judges were brought to administrative responsibility in 10 months of 2009; total protocols on corruption offenses for 10 months of 2009 were drawn up by the Security Service of Ukraine - 35%; Prosecutor's offices for the corresponding period accounted for 28% of protocols, and internal affairs bodies -27%, the average amount of an administrative fine, which is charged in Ukraine based on the results of consideration by judges of protocols on corruption offenses, is UAH 291.84. .
The fight against corruption in Ukraine is carried out in accordance with international acts and national legislation ratified by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. International acts in force in Ukraine include: "UN Convention against Corruption", "Criminal Convention against Corruption", "Civil Convention against Corruption. The most famous of them are the Laws of Ukraine "On Public Service" (in particular Articles 5, 12, 13, 16, 30), "On Combating Corruption", "On the Fundamentals of Preventing and Combating Corruption", "On Liability of Legal persons for committing corruption offenses", "On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine on Responsibility for Corruption Offenses".
The presidents of Ukraine also played an active role in the fight against corruption. To date, the current acts are the Decrees of the President of Ukraine "On mandatory special verification of information submitted by candidates for positions of civil servants" (No. 1098 of November 19, 2001); "On priority measures to de-shadow the economy and combat corruption" (Dated 11/18/05 No. 1615), "On the Concept of overcoming corruption in Ukraine" On the way to integrity "" (dated 11.09.06 No. 742), "On the Council for ensuring the implementation in Ukraine Threshold Program of the Corporation
"Millennium Challenges" to reduce the level of corruption "(dated 23.12.06 No. 1121), "On some measures to improve the formation and implementation of the state anti-corruption policy" (dated 01.02.08 No. 80), "On the decision of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine dated April 21, 2008 "On measures to implement the national anti-corruption strategy and institutional support for a coherent anti-corruption policy" (dated 05.05.08 No. 414), "On the decision of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine of October 31, 2008 "On the state of combating corruption in Ukraine" "(Dated 11.27.08 No. 1101), "On the establishment of the National Anti-Corruption Committee" (dated 26.02.10 No. 275), a decision was made on the formation, the main tasks of the NAC were determined) "The issue of the National Anti-Corruption Committee" (dated 03.26.10 No. 454, the staff was approved and instructed to prepare proposals for making comprehensive changes to new anti-corruption laws).
At first glance, it becomes clear that the number of documents that should help in the fight against corruption in Ukraine and reduce its level is growing significantly year by year, in contrast to the real situation in this area.
It is only possible to radically change the situation by eliminating corruption opportunities in the legislation. The first step on this path is administrative reform. It was with her that the countries of Eastern Europe began after the collapse of the socialist camp. In Ukraine, it has not yet been carried out in a pan-European form. One of its main components is the adoption of the Code of Administrative Procedure, which clearly defines the standards for the work of executive authorities - the requirements for applications, the rights of applicants and interested persons, the functions of the executive body, the deadlines for resolving cases, the procedure for appealing against decisions of authorities, and more. The draft law on the good behavior of civil servants, which prohibits officials from using state property for their own purposes, taking relatives to subordinate positions, and accepting gifts, has not been adopted either.
Ukrainian experts are sure that these changes are unlikely to take place from above, since it is the representatives of the management system who are less interested in them.
It is possible to significantly reduce the corruption opportunities of officials not only with the help of a long path of changes in legislation. It is quite possible to introduce many innovations without changing the laws. This requires only the will of the heads of state authorities and local self-government. And the condition for administrative reform and overcoming corruption at the local level is competent and active civil servants and officials of local self-government, able to withstand political and economic pressures, who receive the necessary public and institutional support for this.
It is also necessary to minimize the personal communication of citizens with officials who prepare or make decisions. This can be achieved through the use of postal communications and e-mail, the creation of single offices where citizens can submit all documents at once, the order of queues, increasing the hours of reception of officials, improving the awareness of citizens through the creation of reference services and electronic resources with a detailed list of all services and the procedure for their provision , the introduction of a mechanism for paying fines through banking institutions, rather than on-site inspection by inspectors.
In the meantime, all these delights will be introduced throughout Ukraine, everyone can significantly reduce corruption risks for themselves by studying in detail the procedure for providing the necessary service by the state. The best way to fight corruption on a personal level is knowledge. The better a person knows the law, the mechanisms for resolving a particular issue, the more he will be protected from corruption. And the proposed anti-corruption reform will be successful only when the institutions of power are able to form new norms of legal, political and economic culture. When corruption becomes only an element of society, and not its component. Unfortunately, today corruption is a vivid but capacious characteristic of Ukrainian society.

CONCLUSION

Summing up, we can conclude that corruption is becoming the norm, not the exception, including among the political, ruling and economic elites. Law enforcement agencies, themselves partly affected by corruption, do not have sufficient capacity and the necessary real independence to fight institutional corruption.
Summing up, it can be argued that the impact of corruption on indicators of the development of the social sphere can be both direct and reverse.
First, corruption significantly inflates the price of public goods.
Secondly, corruption reduces the volume and quality of public goods.
Third, corruption weakens investment in human capital.
Fourth, corruption leads to a reduction in government revenue. Considering,
that the price of public goods due to corruption can be overstated, citizens reduce the demand for goods, which leads to a reduction in the tax base and a decrease in the state's ability to provide quality public services.
At the present stage, corruption in the criminological sense is an anti-social, socially dangerous phenomenon that threatens the economic and political security of Ukraine, which has penetrated the branches of government, constituting a set of crimes committed by officials for personal enrichment at the expense of the state, commercial and other organizations and citizens. This is achieved by obtaining, with the use of official powers, material and other benefits to the detriment of the interests of the state. And objectively, such actions are expressed in the merging of state power and organized crime. The criminological significance of corruption is limited only to those aspects of its general social and political economic meanings that reflect its antisocial, socially dangerous and criminally illegal essence and content.

LIST OF USED SOURCES

Law of Ukraine "On Combating Corruption" dated 19.06.2003// http://ukrconsulting.biz/
The concept of overcoming corruption in Ukraine "On the way to integrity": Order of the President of Ukraine dated September 11, 2006 No. 742 // zakon1.rada.gov.ua
United Nations Convention against Corruption of October 31, 2003// http://www.un.org/ru/ documents/decl_conv/ conventions/corruption.shtml/
A.V. Dlugopolsky, A.Yu. Zhukovskaya. Corruption and social reforms: aspects of mutual influence / Actual problems of the economy No. 8 (110), 2010 [Electronic resource]// http://www.nbuv.gov.ua/portal/ natural/vcpi/TPtEV/2010_63/1_ 23.pdf
Doloshko N.G., Nikolaeva E.G. Determinants of corruption in transition economies [Electronic resource] // http://www.nbuv.gov.ua/portal/natural/vcpi/TPtEV/2010_63/1_23.pdf
Yosifovich D.I. Assessment of the prevalence of corruption in the world. / MITNA RIGHT №4 (76) '2011, part 2
Kozak V.I. The phenomenon of corruption: a scientific view of the real state in Ukraine [Electronic resource]// http://www.nbuv.gov.ua/portal/ Soc_Gum/Nvamu_upravl/2011_2/ 30.pdf
Corruption risks in public administration // "Attorney at Law" -2010. [Electronic resource]

Results of the project "Combating corruption as one of the priorities of state policy in Ukraine: discrepancies between words and actions" [Electronic resource]// www.newcitizen.org.ua
Sungurov. A.Yu. Civic initiatives and prevention of corruption / Edited by St. Petersburg: Norma., 2000. - 224 p.
Chervonozhka V. Corruption in Ukraine: how to really change its scale // Novinar. [Electronic resource]// http://novynar.com.ua/analytics/government/72994
Corruption Perceptions Index Results 2010 [Electronic resource] - Access ModeA:

The issue of combating corruption is one of the eternal issues of the organization of the state.

Perceiving corruption as a systemic phenomenon, the state creates and implements comprehensive measures to counter it. Since 2008, the Anti-Corruption Council under the President has been formed, National Anti-Corruption Plans, a package of anti-corruption laws, a number of decrees of the President of the Russian Federation have been developed and approved, expanding control over the activities of state and municipal employees, heads of state corporations. Federal Law No. 273-FZ of December 25, 2008 “On Combating Corruption” established the basic principles and foundations for the fight against corruption.

An important role in the fight against corruption is played by specific measures that can reduce corruption in the state and society, identify and punish those involved in corruption. A simple and fairly effective measure is the mandatory annual reporting of officials (officials of executive authorities and deputies of the relevant levels) on income and property status. Income declarations of these persons (as well as their children and spouses) are publicly available on the Internet, are covered in the official media, and are checked by control and supervisory authorities.

In most executive authorities, internal security services have been created, the purpose of which is to suppress the corrupt activities of employees within the executive authorities and their territorial bodies in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

No matter how active the role of the state in taking measures to combat corruption, it cannot do without the help of ordinary citizens in this fight.

Every Russian citizen must and must live and work in accordance with the law. In order to avoid corruption phenomena, it is necessary to know one's rights firmly, be able to protect them, have a firm moral position that denies the use of corrupt methods in private, public and professional life.

WHAT IS CORRUPTION?

It is important to clearly understand the essence of this phenomenon and be able to distinguish it from other offenses.

But how then to determine what is corruption and what is not? To date, there is a clear definition of the concept of "corruption", established by law.

The concept of “corruption” is defined in the Federal Law of December 25, 2008 No. 273-FZ “On Combating Corruption”.

Corruption is the abuse of official position, giving a bribe, receiving a bribe, abuse of power, commercial bribery or other illegal use by an individual of his official position contrary to the legitimate interests of society and the state in order to obtain benefits in the form of money, valuables, other property or services of a property nature, other property rights for themselves or for third parties, or the illegal provision of such benefits to the specified person by other individuals, as well as the commission of these acts on behalf of or in the interests of a legal entity.

If a person takes part in the illegal use of his or someone else's official position in order to obtain material or non-material benefits, he becomes part of a corrupt system.

Unfortunately, for a large group of people, giving small bribes to resolve everyday issues does not contradict their own worldview, moral restrictions.

Acts of corruption include the following crimes: abuse of official position (Article 285 and 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), giving a bribe (Article 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), receiving a bribe (Article 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), abuse of power (Article 201 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Russian Federation), commercial bribery (Article 204 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), as well as other acts that fall under the concept of "corruption" mentioned above.

THE ESSENCE OF CORRUPTION

Corruption does not appear in society overnight. The essence of corruption is manifested in those social phenomena with which it is deeply interconnected. These include legal nihilism and insufficient legal literacy of citizens, low civic position of citizens.

Here are some sources of corruption: inefficient and unfair distribution and spending of tangible and intangible benefits, a decrease in the efficiency of state and municipal bodies, a slowdown in economic growth, a decrease in the level of trust in government, and more.

PARTICIPANTS OF CORRUPTION

There are always two parties involved in the corruption process: the bribe-giver and the bribe-taker.

briber- a person who provides the bribe taker with some benefit in exchange for the opportunity to use his powers for his own purposes. The benefits can be money, material values, services, benefits, and so on. At the same time, a prerequisite is that the bribe-taker has administrative or administrative functions.

bribe taker there may be an official, an employee of a private company, a state and municipal employee who, for a fee, exercises his powers for a certain person (circle of persons). He can be expected to perform, as well as non-performance of his duties, transfer of information, etc. At the same time, he can fulfill the requirements on his own or contribute to the fulfillment of the requirements by other persons, using his position, influence and power.

Even without a deep socio-economic study, a number of objective reasons for the existence of corruption in our country are obvious.

Currently, there is a fairly large group of citizens among the population who prefer to take corruption for granted.

A person who gives or takes a bribe receives an immediate benefit. As a rule, the bribe-giver or the bribe-taker does not think about what consequences this may turn out to him.

Sooner or later, the question will arise about the legality of the actions taken, the legality of the income received.

Many do not even think that it is their actions that do not allow them to effectively fight corruption. What is the reason for such a passive attitude of citizens to the corruption situation in the country and to their personal fate? Reasons for corrupt behavior include:

Tolerance of the population to manifestations of corruption;

Lack of fear of losing the received benefit in the future when checking the grounds for its acquisition;

The presence of an official choice of behavior when he can solve the question put to him both positively and negatively;

Psychological insecurity of a citizen when talking with an official;

Ignorance by a citizen of his rights, as well as the rights and obligations of an official or a person performing managerial functions in a commercial or other organization;

Lack of proper control by management over the behavior of an official.

FORMS OF CORRUPTION

Bribe

The main act of corruption is receiving and giving a bribe. A bribe is not only money, but also other tangible and intangible values. Services, benefits, social benefits received for the exercise or non-execution by an official of his powers are also the subject of a bribe.

Bribery is the transfer and receipt of material values, both for general patronage and for connivance in the service. General patronage in the service may include, in particular, actions related to undeserved promotion, extraordinary unjustified promotion, and other actions that are not necessary. Connivance in the service should include, for example, failure by an official to take measures for omissions or violations in the official activities of the bribe giver or persons represented by him, unfair response to his illegal actions.

Abuse of power

Abuse is the use by a corrupt official of his official position contrary to the interests of the service (organization), or clearly beyond his powers, if such actions (inaction) are committed by him out of selfish or other personal interest and entail a significant violation of the rights and legitimate interests of society.

An official, or a person performing managerial functions in a commercial or other organization, in such cases acts within the limits of his powers on formal grounds or goes beyond the limits of his powers. This often happens against the interests of the service and the organization.

Commercial bribery

Similar in its characteristics to the composition of such crimes as giving a bribe and receiving a bribe, is commercial bribery, which is also included in the concept of "corruption".

The difference between these crimes lies in the fact that during commercial bribery, the receipt of material values, as well as the illegal use of property services for actions (inaction) in the interests of the giver (provider), is carried out by a person performing managerial functions in a commercial or other organization.

As well as for bribery, for commercial bribery, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides for criminal liability (up to imprisonment for up to 5 years) of both the person being bribed and the person who is bribing.

However, unlike a bribe, only commercial bribery that is contractual is criminalized, regardless of when the bribery was transferred.

Bribe and gift

An important clarification: there is a difference between a bribe-reward and a gift. If you have an acquaintance who is an official and you want to give him a gift, then you should know that in connection with the performance of his official duties, an employee of a government and administration body is prohibited from receiving remuneration from individuals and legal entities: gifts, cash payments, loans, any property services, payment for entertainment, recreation, transportation costs, etc. Gifts received by employees in connection with protocol events, business trips and other official events are recognized as federal property or the property of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation and must be transferred to a civil servant under an act to the state body in which he serves. However, Article 575 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation allows presenting state and municipal employees with gifts worth no more than three thousand rubles.

RESPONSIBILITY FOR CORRUPTION

It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides for criminal liability up to imprisonment for a term of 8 to 15 years both for receiving a bribe, and from 7 to 12 years for giving a bribe.

That is, not only the person who receives the bribe is responsible before the law, but also the person who gives the bribe, or on whose behalf the bribe is transferred to the bribe taker. If a bribe is transferred through an intermediary, then he is also subject to criminal liability for complicity in giving a bribe.

Bribery is based on two types of crimes: receiving a bribe (Article 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and giving a bribe (Article 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Closely related to them are such criminal acts as commercial bribery (Article 204 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), abuse of official powers (Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and abuse of authority (Article 201 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

The corpus delicti (bribery) will take place regardless of when the bribe was accepted - before or after the performance of the relevant actions, and also regardless of whether there was a preliminary agreement between the bribe giver and the bribe taker.

Giving a bribe (transferring material assets to an official personally or through an intermediary) is a crime aimed at inducing an official to commit legal or knowingly illegal actions (inaction) in favor of the giver: to obtain benefits, for general patronage or for connivance in the service ( Article 291 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

Giving a bribe in the absence of aggravating circumstances is punishable a fine in the amount of 15 to 30 times the amount of the bribe or forced labor for up to three years, or imprisonmentfor up to two years with a fine of ten times the amount of the bribe.

Bribery can be done through intermediary. Intermediation in giving a bribe is the commission of actions aimed at: direct transfer of the subject of the bribe on behalf of the bribe giver. Liability of an intermediary in bribery occurs regardless of whether the intermediary received remuneration for this from the bribe giver (bribe taker) or not.

If a bribe is transferred to an official through an intermediary, then such an intermediary is liable for aiding in giving a bribe.

It must be remembered that the person who gave the bribe is released from criminal liability if:

a) extortion of a bribe by an official;

b) if the person actively contributed to the disclosure and investigation of the crime;

c) if a person, after committing a crime, voluntarily reported about giving a bribe to the body that has the right to initiate a criminal case.

It is necessary to know that receiving a bribe- one of the most socially dangerous official crimes, especially if it is committed on a large or especially large scale by a group of persons by prior agreement or by an organized group with extortion of a bribe.

Circumstances aggravating criminal liability for taking a bribe are:

Taking a bribe by an official for illegal activities(inaction);

Acceptance of a bribe by a person holding public office of the Russian Federation or a public position of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, as well as the head of a local self-government body;

Receiving a bribe by a group of persons by prior agreement or by an organized group (2 or more people);

extortion of a bribe;

Receiving a bribe on a large or especially large scale (a large amount is the amount of money, the value of securities, other property or benefits of a property nature, exceeding 150 thousand rubles, and an especially large amount - exceeding 1 million rubles).

The most lenient punishment for a bribe is a fine, and the most severe is imprisonment for a term. from 8 to 15 years old. In addition, for taking a bribe, they are deprived of the right to occupy certain positions or engage in certain activities for up to three years.

Thus, an attempt to obtain benefits, advantages, avoid troubles with the help of a bribe results in criminal prosecution and punishment.

HOW TO BEAT CORRUPTION

The fight against corruption, first of all, should be expressed in the unwillingness of citizens to participate in corrupt relations.

That is why, in order not to become a victim of corruption, as well as not to take the path of breaking the law yourself, it is necessary to have a clear idea of ​​​​how to fight corruption.

HOW TO BE GOOD?

Let's try to figure out what a citizen can do on his own in order not to become a participant in a corruption crime.

Before applying to state, municipal bodies and institutions, or to commercial or other organizations, we recommend that you study the regulatory framework on the basis of which this or that body, institution, organization operates. After all, it is the knowledge of the laws that will help to understand when an official begins to abuse his position or extort a bribe for actions that he must already perform by virtue of his official duties.

Without much difficulty, this can be done in relation to state and municipal bodies and institutions. In order for the information transparency of the activities of state power to help ordinary citizens fight corruption on their own, all state and municipal authorities are required to post regulations governing their activities on their official websites on the Internet. Therefore, before applying to a particular state or municipal authority, we recommend that you study the information on the activities of this body, available, for example, on the Internet site.

Generalized information on many public services is presented on the website www. gosuslugi. en.

With commercial and other organizations, the situation is more complicated. The legislator in relation to these organizations cannot take similar measures on information transparency, which he took in relation to state and municipal bodies and institutions. However, one should not assume that the activities of commercial and other organizations are not regulated by anything.

These organizations must comply with the laws that govern the area of ​​activity in which the organization operates. So, if you are going to apply to an organization that is engaged in trade, the provision of services or the performance of work, then it is advisable to first study the Law of the Russian Federation of February 7, 1992 No. 2300-1 “On Protection of Consumer Rights”. It should also be remembered that this law, as well as a number of other documents relating to the activities of this organization, must be placed on the trading floor, on a special stand.

If you want to apply to an organization providing medical services, you, in addition to the Consumer Rights Protection Law, need to know what medical services you are obliged to provide free of charge under your compulsory health insurance policy, as well as, if available, a voluntary health insurance policy. medical insurance. In addition, it is advisable to familiarize yourself with the regulations that regulate the procedure for the provision of medical services. For example, the Federal Law of November 29, 2010 No. 326-FZ “On Compulsory Medical Insurance in the Russian Federation”, Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 22, 2012 No. 1074 “On the Program of State Guarantees of Free Provision of Medical Care to Citizens of the Russian Federation for 2013 year and planning period 2014 and 2015”.

If you get a job, then you need to study those sections of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation that relate to the rights and obligations of the employee and the employer.

ADDITIONAL MEASURES

It may not be superfluous to take some additional measures.

You can consult with a lawyer, which will allow you to feel more confident in the conversation.

If possible, make an appeal in writing and submit it to the office of the body to which you are applying. If you apply to a state or municipal authority, then in accordance with the Federal Law of May 2, 2006 No. 59-FZ “On the procedure for considering applications from citizens of the Russian Federation”, you must give an answer within 30 days from the date of your application.

If you have become a victim of abuse by an official or a person performing managerial functions in a commercial or other organization, your official position and powers, then the algorithm of your actions should be exactly the same as when extorting a bribe from you, commercial bribery.

In the event that any check is underway against you by state and municipal authorities (they draw up a protocol on violation of traffic rules or the customs regime, they stop you and ask you to present your passport for verification, etc.), then in order to protect yourself from abuse official position on the part of officials you should:

Check the authority of an official by looking at his official certificate, and remember or write down his full name and position (rank);

Clarify the grounds for imposing sanctions on you, taking actions against you or your property - the norm of the law referred to by the official, remember this information or write it down;

If a protocol or act is drawn up in relation to you, insist on filling in all the columns by the official, without leaving them empty;

Insist that all witnesses whom you consider necessary to be indicated (or witnesses) be indicated in the protocol;

Insist that the minutes contain all the documents that you referred to when giving explanations to the official. If the official refuses to accept these documents, demand a written refusal from him;

Do not sign a protocol or act without reading it carefully;

In case of disagreement with the information entered in the protocol or act, indicate this before signing in order to be able to challenge the specified protocol or act;

Never sign blank sheets or unfilled forms;

In the line of the protocol on an administrative offense, in which you must sign that your rights and obligations are explained to you, put the word NO or a dash if the official who draws up the protocol did not explain them to you or offered to read them on the back. You should not read about your rights and obligations, they should be explained to you;

Insist on issuing you a copy of the protocol or act.

You also need to know that, in accordance with the provisions of Article 28.5 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, a protocol on an administrative offense must be drawn up immediately after an administrative offense is detected. Also, you don't have to prove your innocence.

The Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated March 24, 2005 No. 5 stated: “A person brought to administrative responsibility is not required to prove his innocence. Guilt in committing an administrative offense is established by judges, bodies, officials authorized to consider cases of administrative offenses. Irremovable doubts about the guilt of a person brought to administrative responsibility must be interpreted in favor of this person.

REMINDER TO A CITIZEN ON WHAT TO DO IF A BRIBE IS EXTORTED FROM YOU:

Refuse to give a bribe.

In the event of extortion of a bribe or the inability to refuse to give a bribe (for example, in case of a threat to life and health), this must be reported to law enforcement agencies, but the following recommendations should be observed when communicating with a bribe extorter:

Listen carefully and accurately remember the conditions set for you (amounts of amounts, name of goods and nature of services, terms and methods of transferring a bribe, etc.);

Try to postpone the question of the time and place of the transfer of the bribe until the next conversation;

Do not take the initiative in the conversation, let the "bribe-taker" speak out, tell you as much information as possible;

Contact law enforcement immediately.

WHERE TO APPLY?

The following options are possible:

Appeal of illegal actions within the framework of existing administrative procedures - filing a complaint with the immediate superiors or complaints to higher authorities.

A complaint to the regulatory authorities (in the context of consumer relations, these may be territorial offices of Rospotrebnadzor, the Federal Antimonopoly Service; in the framework of relations with organizations of housing and communal services - housing committees and housing inspections) or the prosecutor's office. Be careful: the accusations should not be unfounded, the complaint must contain specific information and facts.

You must also report the fact of extortion to law enforcement agencies or to the departments of your own security, which, for example, are under the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD of Russia) and the Federal Security Service (FSB of Russia). Oral reports and written statements about crimes are accepted by law enforcement agencies around the clock, regardless of the place and time of the crime.

You can contact the reception of the prosecutor's office, the duty department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, the Federal Security Service of Russia, the customs authority or the drug control authority. You are obliged to listen and accept the message in oral or written form. In this case, you should find out the last name, position and work phone number of the employee who received the message.

Section 1. History of corruption.

Section 2. Typology.

Section 3. Harm from corruption.

Section 4. Reasons.

Section 5. Combating corruption.

Section 6. Economic analysis of corruption.

Section 7Areas of corruption.

Section 8. Corruption in the mirror of the Russian media: from serious to curious.

Corruption- This is a term that usually denotes the use by an official of his powers and rights entrusted to him for the purpose of personal income, contrary to law and moral principles.

History of corruption

In primitive and early class societies, payment to a priest, leader, or military commander for a personal appeal to their help was regarded as a universal norm. The situation began to change as the state apparatus became more complex and professionalized. The rulers of the highest rank demanded that the lower "employees" be content with only a fixed "salary". On the contrary, lower-ranking officials preferred to secretly receive from petitioners (or demand from them) additional payment for the performance of their official duties.

In the early stages of the history of ancient societies (ancient Greek city-states, republican Rome), when there were no professional government officials, corruption was almost absent. This phenomenon began to flourish only in the era of the decline of antiquity, when such state officials appeared, about whom they said: "He came poor to a rich province, and left rich from a poor province." At this time, a special term appeared in Roman law, which was synonymous with the words "spoil", "bribe" and served to refer to any official abuse.

sale commodities by prices below market

Regionalization, as it affects price land

Mining natural resources

sale of state assets, especially state enterprises

Granting monopoly power to a certain type of commercial (especially export-import) activity

control over the shadow economy and illegal business (extortion, protection from prosecution, destruction of competitors, etc.)

Appointment to responsible positions in government.

The forms of corruption listed below relate primarily to judges, but in the case of administrative offenses, they may also apply to officials authorized to consider relevant cases (internal affairs bodies, fire authorities, tax, customs authorities, etc.)

"Forks" in the legislation. Many rules allow the judge to choose between soft and hard penalties so that he can take into account the degree of guilt, the severity of the offense and other circumstances as much as possible. At the same time, the judge has a lever of influence on the citizen who committed the offense. The greater the difference between the upper and lower limits of punishment, the greater the bribe a citizen will be willing to pay.

Alternative administrative penalty. There are rules of law with the imposition of an alternative administrative penalty, for example, or arrest. What distinguishes them from most norms - “forks” is not only a wider range of punishments (and, consequently, a stronger motivation for the violator to give a bribe), but also the fact that justice is carried out by representatives of the executive, and not the judiciary, power. Many lawyers believe that the use of sanctions of this kind is justified only in criminal proceedings. process, but has little basis in the administrative process: “Firstly, the judicial process is built on the principles of openness (publicity), competitiveness, oral and immediacy of the proceedings. In administrative proceedings, the citizen in most cases remains one on one with a representative of the authorities. Secondly, even the highest penalty for an administrative offense is not as severe for the offender as in criminal law, so that it makes sense to differentiate it.

Reclassification of the offense. Another kind of “forks” is the duplication of the composition of the offense in various codes. This opens up opportunities for reclassification of the committed offense into a milder category (for example, from criminal to civil). It is often difficult to distinguish between crimes and other offenses due to the vagueness of the language of the legislation, and in such situations, judges (or officials) decide at their own discretion, which opens up opportunities for bribes and extortion.

Not monetary losses of citizens. Some rules of law can cause corruption if they impose on the individual the losses associated with obeying the rule of law. Even in the case when the amount of the fine and the bribe for the crime are nominally equal, it is worth noting that payment fine accompanied by non-monetary costs of time to complete payment V bank and providing proof of payment (receipt) to the issuing agency. Non-monetary losses caused by the norms of law are diverse and unpleasant for citizens in various ways. It is also worth considering that not all citizens are ready to defend their rights in court.

Harm from corruption

Empirical evidence shows that corruption causes:

inefficient distribution and spending of public funds and resources;

inefficiency of corrupt cash flows from the point of view of the country's economy;

losses taxes when the tax authorities appropriate part of the taxes;

loss of time due to obstacles, reduced efficiency work the state apparatus as a whole;

ruin of private businessmen;

lower investment in production, slower economic growth;

lowering the quality of public services;

misuse of international assistance to developing countries, which sharply reduces its effectiveness;

inefficient use of the abilities of individuals: instead of producing material goods, people spend time on the unproductive search for rent;

growing social inequality;

strengthening of organized crime - gangs turn into a mafia;

damage to the political legitimacy of power;

decline in public morality.

In highly corrupt bureaucracies, most public resources are deliberately channeled into channels where they can be most easily stolen or where bribes are most easily collected. The policy of the ruling elite becomes directed at suppressing the mechanisms of control over corruption (see below): freedom of the press, independence of the judiciary, competing elites (opposition) and further individual rights of citizens.

So, some people note that there are cases when the behavior and appearance of a person is a signal for law enforcement to detain a person in order to extort a bribe.

There is also a point of view that a tolerant attitude towards corruption is permissible. According to one argument, in the history of the development of many countries (Indonesia, Thailand, Korea) there were periods when the economy and corruption grew at the same time. According to another argument, bribery is only the implementation of market principles in the activities of state and municipal structures. Thus, tolerance for corruption is acceptable during an economic boom or as long as it does not affect the whole. Critics of this view argue that, due to the reasons listed above, countries with high levels of corruption after a period of growth risk losing stability and falling into a downward spiral.

Optimal level of corruption

As the state eradicates corruption, the fight against corruption increases so much that it will take endless efforts to completely eliminate corruption. Comparing the losses from corruption and the cost of eradicating corruption for each of its levels, it is possible to find the optimal level of corruption, which reflects the smallest total losses.

In addition, excessive enthusiasm for the fight against corruption to the detriment of eliminating its causes can deprive the administrative system of flexibility, and the population of civil liberties. The ruling group can use punitive legislation to strengthen their control over society and persecute political opponents.

Corruption causes multi-billion dollar losses in international trade. This has become one of the reasons for the growing interest in the problem of international corruption in recent years. For example, US exporting firms have argued that they often lose out on lucrative contracts because they are not legally allowed to pay bribes to overseas officials. On the contrary, in most OSCE countries, bribes to foreign partners not only were not prohibited, but could even be written off from tax benefits. For example, for German corporations, such expenses amounted to about 5.6 billion dollars a year (Eng.). The situation changed only at the end of 1997, when the OSCE countries signed convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions. In pursuance conventions over the following years, laws were passed explicitly forbidding national companies from paying bribes to anyone.

Reasons for corruption

fundamental contradiction

The production of any goods requires the expenditure of certain resources, which is compensated by the funds received from the consumers of these goods. Salaries of employees are among the costs that are ultimately covered by acquirer, however, their activities are determined by the will of the authorities and the employer. This leads to a situation where acquirer receives a required service or product from an employee, but cannot directly influence that employee's performance. A special case is a public good that is paid for by taxes and provided by government employees. Although work officials are actually paid by citizens, their employer is the state, which gives them the right to make decisions affecting the competing interests of various individuals, according to the law.

Without anyone having discretionary power, corruption would be impossible. However, a person or group with supreme power is not able to independently ensure the implementation of the policy that it determines. For this purpose, she appoints administrators, whom she grants the required powers.

It transfers the necessary resources, for which it establishes rules of conduct and over which it exercises supervision. And here comes the following problem:

Conservative law. In practice, instructions change much more slowly than external conditions. Therefore, they leave room for action at their own discretion, because otherwise the management system becomes completely inflexible, and the discrepancy between strict norms and realities can completely stop work. However, this means that in situations not provided for by law, the administrator may begin to be guided by the most favorable rent.

The impossibility of all-encompassing control. Oversight is costly, but also overly strict control strikes at the quality of managerial personnel and leads to an outflow of creatively thinking personnel.

Thus, the principle of governance itself contains the potential for corruption. This possibility develops into objective conditions, when the potential rent outweighs the risks.

This problem is repeatedly reproduced in the bureaucracy, as top-level administrators appoint their subordinates, etc. A feature of systems with a representative power of the people consists in the fact that the highest positions are occupied by political elites who have received power from the people and risk losing power in the next elections.

Reasons for high corruption

Most experts agree that the main reason for high corruption is the imperfection of political institutions that provide internal and external deterrents (see the next section). In addition, there are reasons to believe that some objective circumstances make a significant contribution:

ambiguous laws.

Ignorance or misunderstanding of the laws by the population, which allows officials to arbitrarily interfere with the implementation of bureaucratic procedures or overestimate proper payments.

Unstable political situation in the country.

Lack of established mechanisms for the interaction of government institutions.

The dependence of the standards and principles underlying the work of the bureaucratic apparatus on the policy of the ruling elite.

Professional incompetence bureaucracy.

Nepotism and political patronage, which lead to the formation of secret agreements that weaken the mechanisms for controlling corruption.

Lack of unity in the system of executive power, i.e., regulation of the same activity by different authorities.

Low level of participation of citizens in control over the state.

Hypotheses about the causes of high corruption

Other assumptions are also considered regarding the circumstances that may be the causes of high corruption:

low level wages in the public sector versus the private sector;

state regulation of the economy;

dependence of citizens on officials, the state for certain services;

isolation of the bureaucratic elite from the people;

economic instability, ;

ethnic heterogeneity of the population;

low level of economic development (GDP per capita);

religious tradition;

the culture of the country as a whole.

To date, there is no consensus regarding the confirmation data hypotheses.

Yes, raise wages in the public sector compared to the private sector does not lead to an immediate reduction in corruption. On the other hand, it contributes to a gradual increase in the level of qualification bureaucracy and has an effect in the long run. In countries with the lowest level of corruption, officials' salaries are 3-7 times higher than those in the manufacturing sector.

One of the most controversial issues is the role of state regulation markets and states like monopolies. Free market advocates point out that the diminishing role of the state and the growth competition contribute to reducing corruption by reducing the necessary discretionary power and reducing the ability to achieve market advantage through protective regulation, and therefore the opportunity to seek rent. Indeed, all countries with low corruption are characterized by a relatively free economy. Conversely, a planned economy characterized by bureaucratic monopoly power and keeping prices below market levels creates incentives for bribery as a means of obtaining scarce goods and services.

There are also a number of objections to this argument. First, the private sector is not always able to offer a satisfactory solution to problems, and in such cases, most people consider government intervention justified. This, in turn, creates the prerequisites for unscrupulous supervision and the collection of state rent. Thus, complete elimination of corruption is impossible even in an open economy. Secondly, the process of economic liberalization is carried out by the government, and therefore, in its essence, is also active intervention in the economy (which, in addition, may be accompanied by the creation of sources of corrupt enrichment through privatization). Therefore, in practice, the initial period liberalization is often characterized by the opposite effect - a surge in corruption. Thirdly, studies show that the level of corruption in a liberal democratic political system does not depend on whether the country's leadership adheres to neoliberal or social democratic ideology. Moreover, in many countries with low corruption, public spending is also relatively large (Netherlands, Scandinavia).

The main reason for corruption is the possibility of obtaining economic profit associated with the use of power, the main deterrent is risk exposure and punishment.

Corruption is a huge obstacle to economic growth and development.

Historically, corruption comes from the custom of giving gifts to an official for results achieved through it. Since ancient times, gifts have been given to win favor. A gift distinguished a person from others, and his request was fulfilled. In primitive societies, paying a priest or leader in general was absolutely normal.

But the state apparatus became more complex, the power of the central government increased, professional officials appeared who sought to use their position to secretly increase their income.

Corruption infection has penetrated almost all branches of medicine - this is recognized at the highest state level. The Committee of the State Duma on Security, having analyzed the materials of the Prosecutor General's Office, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Federal Service for Supervision in the Sphere of Healthcare, came to disappointing conclusions - corruption is growing both in quantitative and monetary terms.

The number of initiated criminal cases is steadily growing. If in 1999, according to data The Ministry of Internal Affairs, 5538 crimes were revealed, in 2000 - 6348, in 2002 - 7537, and in 2004 - 6429 crimes, then already in 2008 - already more than 12,000 crimes.

The amount of material damage caused is also growing. In 2003, the damage amounted to more than 180 million rubles, in 2004 - 174 million rubles, and for 6 months of 2008 - almost 820 million rubles.

But these are just numbers. And behind them are thousands of human lives.

The facts of fraud and enrichment at the expense of public funds in the field of health care, undoubtedly, have the most serious impact on the quality of medical services, but there are also more terrible things. Preparations containing narcotic substances. In small doses, they are indispensable in the treatment of a number of diseases. But due to the corruption of those responsible for the safe storage and distribution of such drugs, they are political parties get on drugs. Every year, law enforcement agencies record more and more cases of theft of potent psychotropic and narcotic drugs by employees of medical institutions, people called upon to save lives and restore health. From this we can draw the only disappointing conclusion - corruption in medicine, namely, the situation associated with narcotic, psychotropic and other potent drugs threatens the health of the nation.

In some cases, corruption has become the only way to obtain nominally free services that the state is obliged to provide to its citizens. Corruption in medicine not only contributes to the formation of a negative moral and ethical situation in society. It deepens discrimination against citizens based on their social status, has a destructive effect on the public administration system, and reduces the country's economic growth opportunities. In legal terms, corruption in healthcare leads to a massive violation of the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens.

Fight against corruption

To date, there are no methods in pedagogy and management that would guarantee that a person will be an ideal official. However, there are many countries with very low levels of corruption. Moreover, historical examples are known when actions aimed at reducing corruption led to significant success: , Hong Kong, . This unequivocally speaks in favor of the fact that methods of combating corruption exist.

From a formal point of view, if there is no state, there will be no corruption. The ability of people at this stage of development to cooperate effectively without a state is very much in doubt. Nevertheless, in an environment where corruption is widespread almost everywhere, the dissolution of corrupt authorities seems to be one of the effective radical ways to get rid of it.

Apart from the dissolution of the authorities, there are three possible approaches to reduce corruption. First, it is possible to tighten laws and their enforcement, thereby increasing risk punishment. Second, economic options can be created that allow officials to increase their income without violating the rules and laws. Third, the role of markets can be strengthened and competition thereby reducing the potential profit from corruption. The latter also applies to the provision of public services, subject to the duplication of functions by some state bodies of other bodies. Most of the well-established methods relate to internal or external oversight mechanisms.

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………..2

§ 1. Types of corruption ……………………………………………………….4

§2 Forms of corruption in Russia…………………………………………….6

§ 3. Socio-economic and political consequences generated by corruption ……………………………………………………………………………15

§ 4. Economic losses from corruption ……………………………23

Examples of corruption cases…………………………26

§5 Anti-corruption methods………………………………………33

Conclusion………………………………………………………………36

References………………………………………………………..38

Applications……………………………………………………………..39

Introduction

Today, the topic of combating corruption is in the center of public attention, does not leave the agenda of the President of the Russian Federation. Corruption not only drastically hinders the socio-economic development of Russia, hinders the implementation of national projects, but also hinders the further integration of the Russian economy into the global one, and worsens Russia's image abroad. It poses a serious threat to the functioning of public authority on the basis of law and law, the rule of law and undermines the population's confidence in the authorities, significantly slows down the economic development of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

Corruption as a type of crime is closely intertwined with other types of antisocial manifestations and, above all, with organized crime, the shadow economy and terrorism, "feeds" them and "feeds" on them. This makes it necessary to consider this phenomenon not as a set of individual facts of influence on the adoption of managerial decisions through bribing officials, but as an emerging and developing system that is a serious challenge of our time, a real threat to the national and economic security of countries, including Russia in the first place. Corruption is beginning to seriously affect the slowdown in economic growth, the reduction of the capacity of civil society institutions, the violation of human rights, and other negative impacts on the legal system.

The issues of combating corruption are becoming increasingly important in modern conditions. Corruption is a dangerous socially negative phenomenon that poses a threat to state institutions and the stability of public life. The legislation of the Russian Federation contains a number of shortcomings and gaps that limit the ability to effectively combat corruption as a dangerous socially negative phenomenon. The incompleteness and unsystematic nature of the legal framework for combating corruption has a negative effect; lack of a legislative definition of corruption, clear provisions on the powers and responsibilities of state bodies and officials; underestimation of the legal regulation of the issues of anti-corruption monitoring and anti-corruption expertise of legislative acts.

The causes of corruption as a dangerous social phenomenon lie in the very way of life, the analysis of which requires the isolation of certain aspects - economic, political, socio-psychological. At the same time, for lawyers, the fight against corruption is not only “an aimed shot with sharpened norms”, but also an attempt to understand how these norms are perceived by people and refracted in real life.

Corruption is facilitated by political instability, underdevelopment and imperfection of legislation, inefficiency of government institutions, weakness of civil society institutions and the absence of strong democratic traditions.

Thus, the study of corruption as a socio-cultural problem, its impact on the spheres of society's life and the development of effective anti-corruption policy measures are now an urgent need.

§ 1. Types of corruption

Depending on the field of activity, the following types of corruption should be distinguished:

Corruption in the sphere of public administration.

parliamentary corruption.

Corruption in enterprises.

Corruption in the sphere of public administration takes place because there is an opportunity for a civil servant (official) to manage state resources and make decisions not in the interests of the state and society, but based on their personal selfish motives.

Depending on the hierarchical position of civil servants, corruption can be divided into top and bottom.

The first covers politicians, higher and middle officials and is associated with the adoption of decisions that have a high price (legal formulas, government orders, changes in ownership, etc.). The second is widespread at the middle and lower levels and is associated with the constant, routine interaction between officials and citizens (fines, registrations, etc.).

Often, both parties interested in a corrupt transaction belong to the same state organization. For example, when an official gives a bribe to his boss for covering up the corrupt actions of the bribe-giver, this is also corruption, which is usually called "vertical". It usually acts as a bridge between top and bottom corruption. This is especially dangerous, since it indicates the transition of corruption from the stage of disparate acts to the stage of taking root organized forms.

Most experts who study corruption include the purchase of votes during elections as well.

According to the Constitution, the voter has a resource called "authority". He delegates these powers to elected persons through a specific type of decision - voting. The voter must make this decision based on considerations of transferring his powers to someone who, in his opinion, can represent his interests, which is a socially recognized norm. In the case of buying votes, the voter and the candidate enter into a deal, as a result of which the voter, violating the mentioned norm, receives money or other benefits, the candidate, violating the electoral legislation, hopes to acquire a power resource. It is clear that this is not the only type of corrupt practices in politics.

Finally, about corruption in non-governmental organizations, the existence of which is recognized by experts. An employee of an organization (commercial or public) can also dispose of resources that do not belong to him: he also has the possibility of illegal enrichment through actions that violate the interests of the organization, in favor of the second party, which receives its benefits from this. An obvious example from Russian life is loans received for bribes from commercial banks for projects whose purpose is to withdraw money and disappear. Thus, the UFSNP in St. Petersburg in the course of work on criminal cases under Art. 1622 part 2 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR, it was established that the Varash company, which received 200 million rubles as an advance payment for goods from various commercial structures, and Extroservice LLP, which received a loan from the Baltic Bank in the amount of 300 million rubles, converted these funds , transported them abroad under a false contract and ceased their activities. The director of the company "Varash" was killed.

§ 3 Forms of corruption in Russia

There is no definition of corruption in Russian legislation.

Nevertheless, this phenomenon has become the norm in the politics of the economy and public life in Russia. Corruption no longer threatens these areas, but is an integral part of them. Every Russian pays a corruption tax hidden in the price of food and essential goods, travel in transport, utilities, construction of housing and roads, medical and educational services.

According to opinion polls conducted by the Public Opinion Foundation (FOM) in March 2008, 55 percent of Russians believe that it is impossible to eradicate corruption in our country, 34 percent say that it is real, 11 percent of respondents found it difficult to answer.

Corruption has become a real threat to national security because:

The very development of the Russian state nullifies or slows down large-scale economic and social transformations;

Expands the shadow economy sector reduces tax revenues to the budget makes the use of budgetary funds inefficient;

Negatively affects the image of the country in the eyes of its political and economic partners; worsens the investment climate;

Increases property inequality of citizens;

Forms in the public mind an idea of ​​the defenselessness of citizens both in the face of crime and in the face of power;

Is a breeding ground for organized crime, terrorism and extremism;

Leads to the degradation of the moral values ​​of the society of primordial national traditions and customs;

The electoral process has a negative impact on the formation of the political elite, the activities of government bodies and civil society institutions.

Common causes of corruption in Russia include:

· rapid ill-conceived transition to market relations against the backdrop of globalization processes in the world;

a radical change in the state structure;

· unjustified privatization carried out with significant violations, as a result of which an insignificant part of the new owners turned out to be the winners;

· inefficiency of management (incompletion and imperfection of administrative reform);

· shortcomings of the legislation and its lagging behind the development of socio-economic relations;

· the state of public morality, the planting of new moral values, the central place among which is occupied by the cult of personal prosperity and enrichment, and money is the measure and equivalent of life's well-being;

a high gap between the very rich and the very poor;

legal illiteracy of the vast majority of the country's population;

· inefficient functioning of most institutions of power;

· personnel technical and operational unpreparedness of law enforcement agencies to counter organized crime, including corrupt structures at all levels of government;

· lack of a developed civil society of democratic traditions;

· low material support of civil servants and the absence of a guaranteed social package.

The specifics of national corruption is:

· the presence of a powerful, widely ramified shadow economy and huge illegal incomes, a significant part of which is the main source of financing for corrupt officials;

· uncontrolled circulation of additional money supply caused by high energy prices in the world market;

· non-execution or improper execution of adopted laws and anti-corruption measures;

· the complexity of inconsistency and the possibility of ambiguous interpretation of existing legal norms;

the presence of many by-laws that arbitrarily interpret the norms of the current legislation;

· Weakness and actual dependence on the executive branch of the judiciary;

· the absence of a system of control bodies, including parliamentary and public control;

· minimal risk of exposure of corrupt officials and the absence of harsh repressive measures against them (conditional or deferred punishment, pardon under an amnesty, etc.);

· the lack of a guaranteed legal status and decent pensions for state and municipal employees;

· exceptional in comparison with other democratic states bureaucracy's monopoly on decision-making;

a large number of decisions that officials have the right to take alone;

· wide and unhindered personnel exchange between government and commercial structures;

· involvement of relatives in the corruption process at the grassroots level of power and in everyday life;

· constant complication and modification of forms and methods of corruption manifestations;

· Corruption of electoral processes (the so-called "administrative resource") and criminalization of political parties;

· the international orientation of Russian corruption;

the unprecedented development of everyday corruption based on the historically determined principle of governance of the Russian state - the institution of feeding. As a result, a large part of the country's population has historically developed a stereotype of corruption as an ethically acceptable form of resolving personal problems. According to the Public Opinion Foundation (March 2008), 54 percent of Russians tolerate the fact that they have to pay bribes to officials; 27 percent of those surveyed admitted that they had "made offerings" to officials. Moreover, young people show a more tolerant attitude towards bribery than the elderly.

Experts highlight the corruption potential of individual regions of the Russian Federation. Corruption is most widespread in those regions that have the greatest economic resources, especially where they are concentrated in a limited number of economic entities.

The most corrupt territories include: large cities, transport hubs, coastal and border cities, ports.

At the same time, experts say that there are no zones free from corruption in Russia.

As shown by most sociological surveys, the most corrupt are: health care, housing and communal services, education, the power system, law enforcement, tax and customs services.

The greatest danger is corruption in state and local authorities, as well as in the economy.

Here are widespread manifestations of corruption such as:

Overestimation of the cost of capital construction and the purchase of expensive equipment;

Developing one's own business by creating financial incentives or paying kickbacks to doctors for referring patients to a specific organization, often headed by their relatives;

Receiving bribes for interfering with the practice of hiring, licensing, accreditation or certification of certain structures;

Establishment of management companies controlled by municipal officials to provide public services to the population; delivery of municipal non-residential premises for a fee to commercial structures;

With the introduction of the Unified State Examination (USE) system, facts of bribes for ensuring high scores began to be noted. Moreover, most of them moved to schools. For example, according to the results of the Unified State Examination in 2007, graduates of the republics of the North Caucasus received the highest scores in the Russian language.

According to most experts, among the branches of power in Russia, the most corrupt is the executive branch.

With the direct participation of officials, there is a redistribution of property: through custom-made bankruptcies, unfriendly mergers and acquisitions of all kinds of corporate conflicts related to the seizure of someone else's business, including the recently spread raider seizures of property.

According to experts, the profit of the raiders is commensurate with the income from the drug trade. And if the benefit from raiding in industry is estimated at 500 percent, then in agriculture it is 1000 percent.

As a result, vast agricultural lands are being taken out of circulation. This leads to further impoverishment of rural residents, a reduction in food production, an increase in their cost, and a slowdown in the implementation of the national project "Development of the Agro-Industrial Complex".

The scope of the current criminal Russian raiding would be impossible without the high level of corruption in public authorities and local self-government.

According to the General Prosecutor's Office of Russia, judges, bailiffs, employees of law enforcement, tax, and executive authorities of local administrations have been convicted of mercenary indulgence in dubious land transactions and direct violation of laws.

In addition, the economy is recognized as the most bribe-intensive : credit and financial sphere, money circulation, foreign trade, securities market, real estate transactions, market of precious metals and stones.

Less prone to corruption are low-practicing private medicine, small businesses, as well as innovative businesses, the effectiveness of which corrupt officials still find it difficult to assess.

One of the most corrupt areas is the procurement of goods (works, services) for state needs. Every year, Russia loses about 1 percent of GDP due to corruption in the state order system.

The most critical is the situation in the banking sector, as multi-billion sums are legalized through fake banks created for 1-3 months with the help of front companies. Most of the funds are proceeds from illegal business. Cashed "live" money is used to bribe officials and politicians, expand the shadow economy, reproduce organized crime, and purchase weapons for terrorist and extremist centers.

In the field of social security, the eviction of single pensioners from their apartments through the system of patronage and illegal seizure of their housing has been widely developed. In this case, there is not only illegal interaction of municipal officials with law enforcement officers, but also their "merging" with representatives of criminal structures. It is not without the participation of officials of the regional and municipal authorities that the funds allocated for the maintenance of the disabled and the elderly are embezzled. Hidden forms of such theft are the purchase of medicines, foodstuffs and other consumer goods at inflated prices, as well as with expiring or expired shelf life.

Corruption phenomena have also spread in the judicial system. There are known facts when judges in arbitrations and courts of general jurisdiction decide cases in favor of a more wealthy side. There are cases of delaying cases at the request of the obviously losing side of the process, which is often used to keep illegally seized property and extract maximum profit from it. Conducted sociological surveys show that only 14 percent of respondents answered that the current court is objective, more than 21 percent believe that it is not objective, and over 57 percent believe that "it's all about the price."

Experts note that in Russia the corruption of the electoral process is quite high.

Corruption here is expressed in illegal financing of election campaigns, information provision of elections by organizations and the media out of selfish or other interest, bribery of persons called upon to ensure the openness and transparency of the election process (observers, members of election commissions with an advisory vote).

In recent years, the leaders of large organized criminal groups have been actively working to introduce their representatives into the legislative and executive authorities at all levels to lobby their interests. Having extensive opportunities and connections, they are actively mastering the electoral system by directing significant material and financial resources to the electoral funds of their representatives. The most active of them themselves run for various elective posts.

The relevance of this problem is also evidenced by the results of sociological research. Thus, according to a poll by the FOM, 76 percent of Russians are sure that there are persons associated with organized crime in the authorities of their regions. At the same time, 63 percent of respondents believe that this is a very common phenomenon, and 45 percent noted that compared to the beginning of the 90s. criminal elements in power has become much greater.

As the statistics of corruption scandals show, the most attractive for organized crime is the municipal government because of the comparatively small electorate and the significance of uncontrolled financial flows caused by the transfer of state powers to the municipal level.

The penetration of representatives of organized crime into the authorities is facilitated by: the deformation of public consciousness, the low legal and political culture of the population, its insufficient political activity.

Corruption has also penetrated the institutions of civil society. Separate non-governmental anti-corruption organizations are either involved in the process of confrontation between various groups of influence, including financial and industrial ones, and are used by them as a means of pressure on competitors, or are engaged in their own business, which has nothing to do with combating corruption.

The media do not justify their role in combating corruption. Custom articles, dependence on owners, the pursuit of "fried" but unverified facts, hidden advertising are evidence that the media are also involved in the general corruption process.

Thus, the effectiveness of anti-corruption countermeasures on the part of state structures and civil society institutions turns out to be extremely low, inadequate to the scale of this phenomenon and threats to Russia's national security. Taking into account the fact that in the youth environment there is a very tolerant attitude towards bribes, this problem will remain relevant for a long time.

§ 4. Socio-economic and political consequences generated by corruption

Corruption has a corrupting effect on all spheres of society: economy, social sphere, politics. The negative consequences generated by this phenomenon not only impede the progressive, progressive development of society, but also pose a serious threat to the interests of the country's national security.

In the economic sphere Corruption contributes to the emergence and development of a number of negative phenomena and processes:

Violates the mechanism of market competition, since the winner is not the one who is competitive, but the one who was able to get advantages for bribes. This contributes to the emergence of monopolistic tendencies in the economy, reducing the efficiency of its functioning and discrediting the ideas of free competition.

It entails an inefficient distribution of state budget funds, especially in the distribution of government orders and the allocation of loans, thereby hindering the effective implementation of government programs.

It leads to an unfair distribution of income, enriching the subjects of corrupt relations at the expense of other members of society.

Contributes to higher prices for goods and services due to the so-called corrupt "overhead" as a result of which the consumer suffers.

It is a means of providing favorable conditions for the formation and development of organized crime and the shadow economy. This leads to a decrease in tax revenues to the state budget, the outflow of capital abroad and makes it difficult for the state to effectively perform its economic, political and social functions.

In the social sphere The negative consequences of corruption are as follows:

Corruption implies a significant difference between declared and real values ​​and forms a "double standard" of morality and behavior among members of society. This leads to the fact that money becomes the measure of everything in society, the significance of a person is determined by the size of his personal fortune, regardless of the methods of obtaining it, there is a devaluation and destruction of civilized social regulators of people's behavior: moral norms, religious rights, public opinion, etc.

Corruption contributes to the unfair redistribution of life's blessings in favor of narrow oligarchic groups, which results in a sharp increase in property inequality among the population, the impoverishment of a significant part of society and an increase in social tension in the country.

Corruption discredits law as the main instrument for regulating the life of the state and society. In the public mind, an idea is being formed about the defenselessness of citizens both in the face of power and in the face of crime.

In the political sphere The negative consequences of corruption are manifested in the following:

Corruption contributes to the shift of policy goals from national to ensuring the rule of oligarchic clans and groups.

Corrupt entities hiding their capital abroad are turning into a "fifth column" and contributing to the betrayal of the country's national security interests.

Corruption undermines the prestige of the country in the international arena, contributes to its political and economic isolation.

Corruption reduces society's trust in government, causes disappointment in the values ​​of democracy and can contribute to the transition to another, more rigid form of government - dictatorship.

Russia's gigantic resources are the "magnet" that attracts various forces (both within the country and abroad) interested in taking possession of them, including transnational and international corporations. To achieve criminal goals, these structures use all means at their disposal - influence through government bodies and at the diplomatic level (including custom-made assessment and criticism of certain decisions of the Russian top leadership), special services, organized criminal communities (including international ones), terrorist organizations, banking structures, non-profit and non-governmental organizations, criminal and shadow economy entities, etc.

According to experts, annual corruption in Russia reaches about one third of the country's budget; bribery "covers" a significant part of businessmen, business without bribes practically does not develop in the country; Corruption, its scope and social consequences as a system of relations based on the illegal activities of representatives of public authorities, is a serious obstacle to the socio-economic development of the country and the successful implementation of strategic national programs.

As a result of the implementation of socio-economic transformations over the past years, society and social relations have moved into a qualitatively different state, characterized, in particular, by a strong merging of government bodies, business organizations and criminals, which dictates an urgent need to review the functions and tasks of law enforcement agencies, national security agencies , forces for ensuring economic security and law and order.

The transition of Russian society to a new state is inextricably linked with the emergence of new challenges and threats to both national security as a whole and its most important components, such as economic and public security. The emergence of these threats against the backdrop of a strong lag and insufficient development of the legislative framework of the Russian state is primarily associated with:

Accelerated capitalization of the economic relations of society;

Rapid development of market relations;

Russia's involvement in global world economic relations;

Globalization of the world economy;

Globalization and transnationalization of crime in the main vital areas of social relations;

The emergence and development of international terrorism, and so on.

All this requires serious reflection and development of new mechanisms for organizing the fight against national and transnational crime.

Corruption is a kind of indicator of the state of security of society. Its scale indicates that the sphere of shadow economic activity in our country can be much larger than those estimates that are currently the most common (40 - 45%). Based on the commensurability with the national budget of estimates of the total amount of financial resources used for bribes and bribery of state and other officials, it can be expected that the volume of the shadow economy may exceed (at the same time significantly) the volume of the legal economy, which also poses a clear threat to the economic security of the country.

At the same time, it can be said with certainty that economic relations and the economy as a whole lie at the basis of the triggers for the emergence and development of corruption, and economic crimes are its foundation. The "nourishing" environment for corruption is free, unrecorded, including illegally acquired money, which appears, as a rule, as a result of economic crimes. It follows that in order to effectively combat corruption, it is necessary, first of all, to take measures to undermine the economic foundations of this negative phenomenon and reduce the volume of cash circulation in economic activity (reducing it to a controlled minimum); to carry out measures to combat economic crimes and suppress illegal financial flows. Today we can say that the economic foundations of corruption, organized crime and terrorism represent a kind of independent sector of the economy.

In order to develop effective mechanisms for combating corruption, it is necessary not only to comprehend its essence and scale, but also to identify the structure of this complex criminal phenomenon in its relationship with the main political, economic, social and other processes of the country's life.

When carrying out corrupt activities, various mechanisms are used: political and social (pressure, concessions, games on human weaknesses and ambition, etc.), economic (bribery, bribe, material gain, etc.), mechanisms of blackmail and threats, as well as espionage and other illegal activities, which together represent a complex system.

A characteristic feature of the current state not only of Russia, but of the entire world community is the high dynamics of the development of forms and methods of crime, the growth in the number of crimes using powerful intellectual potential and the capabilities of the latest information and other technologies and tools.

Despite opposition from the state, the adoption of various preventive, preventive and punitive measures, modern corruption covers more and more new areas of life, negatively affecting primarily the political stability and economic security of the country, undermining them from the inside and creating a real threat to national security.

As new areas of influence, corrupt individuals who, uniting in organized criminal communities, primarily choose areas with an unstable legal basis, weakened law enforcement protection and territories with a multinational population and a long history of unresolved conflicts. It can be concluded that the use of only punitive measures of struggle does not allow for effective control over corruption and its negative manifestations. Corruption traditionally pursues economic and political goals, is a means of fighting for economic dominance and political power, and is directed primarily against the economic, social and political institutions of society. Over the past decade, the scope of threats posed by national and transnational corruption has expanded markedly. It began to include threats of a social and political nature, including threats to the territorial integrity of the country. The results of the most high-profile corruption scandals indicate that one of the negative consequences of such actions is the weakening of the national currency, a decrease in the investment attractiveness of the state, as well as a general decrease in the level of development of the national economy. The economy of the state in the conditions of a post-industrial society with a prevailing financial sector becomes very sensitive to any negative impacts, especially those caused by corrupt activities.

In addition, corruption finds support in the society itself, which, being content with momentary benefits, undermines the foundations of its existence. This is most clearly manifested in countries with economies in transition, including Russia, where the problems of poverty and unemployment remain unresolved.

As already noted, in most cases, corruption processes are due to the economic interests of certain strata of society, social groups or individuals. Their corrupt activities are aimed precisely at illegal enrichment or obtaining the required economic results. In recent years, the revenue and expenditure parts of the federal budget of Russia, the volume of external and internal investments have increased significantly. The consequence of this was an increase in financial flows, which are the object of attention of both various commercial structures and part of the bureaucracy, jointly striving for quick and easy money. The unity of interests in this case acts as one of the main factors stimulating the emergence and development of corrupt ties between government and business.

Modern corruption is a set of branched structures that not only carry out illegal activities, but are also included in the international mechanisms of the shadow economy. Some corrupt organizations have actually turned into network structures and are able not only to fully finance their activities, but also to accumulate financial resources to expand them, to finance scientific research aimed at developing schemes of criminal activity for corruption purposes.

Currently, we can talk about the emergence of the phenomenon of "corruption economy". This phenomenon can be viewed as a kind of parallel economy, which includes the corrupt management of the production, distribution and consumption of various goods, including for the purpose of financial support for the most corrupt activities. Of particular concern is the fact that corruption in conjunction with organized crime carries out the production and sale of prohibited goods that bring super profits (drugs, weapons), human trafficking, etc. In addition, corrupt organizations can control certain areas of legal production and circulation of goods, works and services .

Through corrupt activities, criminal communities illegally appropriate a part of the country's legal GDP, including withdrawing (according to experts and information from various sources) in their favor up to 30% of budget funds.

The role of offshore companies in the mechanisms of corruption is constantly growing. Largely due to the difficulties in establishing the sources of origin of funds of these companies, this channel is successfully used for illegal corrupt activities and obtaining funds for its implementation. Thus, it can be stated that modern corrupt organizations use numerous sources of funding for their illegal activities.

§ 5. Economic losses from corruption

One of the most important problems that contribute to the knowledge of corruption, its coverage and overcoming, is to determine the scale of the damage caused to society by this negative phenomenon.

To assess the losses from corruption, let's turn to the report prepared by the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy and the Indem Foundation, which summarizes a number of examples where such damage has been identified.

First, it has been calculated that in Italy, following Operation Clean Hands against corruption, public spending on road construction has been reduced by 20%.

Secondly, scientists at Harvard University have calculated that reducing a country's corruption from the level of Mexico to the level of Singapore produces an effect equivalent to a 20% increase in tax collection.

If this estimate is applied to the amount of tax revenue collected in Russia in 1997 (according to the government, 65% of the planned budget), then 20% will be 49 trillion (non-denominated) rubles. This is more than all last year's budget expenditures for science, education, health care and culture and art combined.

Thirdly, let's mention the case of one British official of the Ministry of Defense, who was sentenced to 4 years for bribes, the minimum value of which was 2.25 million dollars. Experts from the British branch of TI found that the damage caused by the actions of the official, for which he received bribes, amounted to 200 million dollars, i.e. almost a hundred times greater than the total amount of bribes. It is easy to see from many domestic examples that this ratio between the amount of bribes and the damage caused by corrupt decisions can be even more significant.

Fourth, attention should be paid to the world's most widespread source of top-level corruption - government orders and purchases. According to estimates, losses from corruption in this area often exceed 30% of all budget expenditures under these items. (If we use this ratio, then anti-corruption measures are able to save us from losses in the military sphere alone in the amount of almost 8 trillion non-denominated rubles.)

According to Udo Miller, head of the Hesse State Audit Office, bribes in this area often amount to up to 20% of the amount of transactions; however, the bribes are not paid in cash, but are transferred to the appropriate persons through shell companies or take the form of inflated bills for work performed. According to experts, the cost of about 40% of all buildings erected by order of federal, land and municipal authorities is overpriced. According to the chief prosecutor of Frankfurt am Main, corruption in construction causes the state an annual loss of 10 billion marks, in particular by overestimating the real market cost of work by 30%.

Dieter Frisch, former Director General for Development at the European Commission, noted that when losses increase in a country due to economically weak corrupt projects, these losses do not come down to an excess of 10-20% of the cost of bribes, but include, as a rule, the entire the cost of unproductive and unnecessary projects.

To the above examples, we can add the estimates of our law enforcement agencies, according to which criminal structures in certain industries - oil, gas, rare metals - spend up to 50% of their profits (real, not declared) on bribing various officials. If we use the above ratio between the size of bribes and losses from corruption, then it is easy to establish the order of the corresponding amounts, which will be calculated in billions of dollars.

Now let's turn to grassroots corruption. According to some estimates, the total amount of bribes paid by small entrepreneurs is equivalent to 3% of GDP. According to experts of the Russian public organization "Technologies - XXI Century", small entrepreneurs spend at least 500 million dollars a month on bribes to officials throughout the country! It turns into a sum of 6 billion dollars a year. (It should be added that these calculations do not include payments from small entrepreneurs to "roofs".) Preliminary analysis shows that 10% of all income in small and medium-sized businesses is spent on corrupt transactions. At the same time, at the initial stage (registration of enterprises, etc.), the costs are significantly higher. "Entering business" requires permission from about 50 officials. These losses are passed directly on to ordinary buyers and small business customers, since the money spent on bribes is built into the price of goods and services.

Add to this the poorly studied and practically uncontrolled corruption within enterprises and non-governmental organizations (for example, the provision of loans by commercial banks for bribes), which also reduces the efficiency of the economy.

Thus, the total losses from corruption in our country can be from 10 to 20 billion dollars a year. These data are not presented here to surprise or scare anyone. It is important to see differently how cost-effective investments can be in serious meaningful activities to systematically limit corruption.

Examples of corruption cases

According to one foreigner (German) working in Russia for a large Western firm, in Russia a bribe is given not so that someone helps you illegally, but so that he does not interfere with your normal work. Even if someone has already been given a bribe, there is a high probability that someone else will immediately appear who will have to be given again ... The Prosecutor General's Office summed up the year of the fight against corruption within the framework of the National Anti-Corruption Plan approved by Dmitry Medvedev on July 31, 2008. According to Prosecutor General Y. Chaika, it follows that the heads of state authorities and local self-government bodies are more often brought to criminal responsibility for economic crimes. However, the most common cases in the field of corruption remain the so-called. household bribes are bribes to doctors, teachers, traffic police officers. According to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, in the first half of 2009, 9861 cases of bribery were registered for a total amount of more than 48 million rubles. We propose to look at the state of affairs in the struggle of the state against corruption and bureaucratic arbitrariness on the basis of the print media. Every year the number of corruption crimes increases more and more. And there is no trend of their decline. These crimes are acquiring more and more sophisticated forms of money withdrawal, for example, in the form of offices affiliated with government agencies for all kinds of "registration", "expedited receipt" of permits. (An affiliate is an individual or legal entity capable of influencing the activities of legal and / or persons engaged in entrepreneurial activities). The newspaper "AiF" (dated September 2, 2009, "Officials - for self-sufficiency") tells that the current bureaucrats deliberately create artificial problems, come up with unnecessary certificates and approvals, and then offer to overcome all this "According to the simplified scheme." This practice is also widely known: bureaucrats, through relatives and friends, manage desks affiliated with government agencies that help them get the necessary paper from them for money.

According to statistics: in terms of corruption, Russia is in 143rd place out of 180 countries (according to Transparency International). The Prosecutor General's Office says that the main corrupt officials are government officials, their income from corrupt activities ranges from 120 to 320 billion dollars a year. And this situation is no longer shocking. It's no secret that there are people in the civil service who work for a long time for a relatively low salary, but at the same time have real estate abroad in the West. Their families and children, as a rule, are already “over the hill”.

According to the "independent" foundation Indem, which specializes in researching corruption, about 260 billion euros a year in Russia is spent on bribes. Over the past five years, this figure has increased tenfold. Official figures on corruption in Russia are two thousand times lower than the real state of crime in this area. This was announced in June in the Investigative Committee under the Prosecutor's Office (SKP) of the Russian Federation.

The Kommersant newspaper (dated September 25, 2009, “Russian corruption does not indulge in diversity”) reports that according to the international anti-corruption organization Transparency International, which published a report for 2009 - “Corruption and the Private Sector”, the level of corruption has increased in around the world, despite the crisis. Private business spends at least $40 billion annually on bribes to officials. Since during this period "a huge market of financial state assistance opens up and every businessman hurries to be the first to be at this source." Between business and government in such cases, there is "corruption in its classic form, when both parties voluntarily agree to work, for example, on kickbacks." Russian big business, according to Transparency International, differs from big business in other countries only by a noticeably greater degree of merging with bureaucracy. As for small or medium-sized businesses in Russia, the amount of corruption in this area is "about the same as in other countries, but they are completely different in essence and form." Experts also noted the growth of domestic corruption in Russia. If in 2007 only 17% of Russians stated that they were forced to give a bribe at least once a year, in 2009 there were already 29% of such citizens. Is it impossible to fight bribes when the one who is instructed to fight them takes them himself? After all, those who are “caught for the sake of appearance” are only “small fish”, the so-called “bubble collectors”. They can get away with a lot if there is a serious enough patron. So "Novaya Gazeta" (dated July 13, 2009, "Bablosbornik") reports that the chief expert of the organizational and inspection department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation A. Zharkov was caught on a bribe of 850 thousand dollars, which he extorted from the general director of Finservisconsulting LLC “The career of 35-year-old Colonel Alexander Petrovich Zharkov can be called brilliant without exaggeration. In just six years - from 1999 to 2005 - the detective of the district police department rose through the ranks to the position of the chief expert of the federal ministry. According to employees of the internal security department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs who participated in the "development" of Zharkov, his incredibly fast career growth indicates the presence of a serious patron.

However, crimes committed by law enforcement officers and special services exist not only in the field of bribery. The Kommersant newspaper (dated August 27, 2009, “GRU officer caught in dishonest connections”) reported that at the end of August, preliminary hearings began at the Moscow District Military Court in a high-profile case of an international criminal group whose members are accused of selling in slavery for prostitution of more than 130 women. The newspaper “Nasha Versiya” (dated September 28, 2009, “Is the Perm Territory an incubator of potential Evsyukovs?”) reports that in recent years an increase in the number of raider seizures of factories, plants, defense enterprises, even research institutes has been noted in the Kama region. “The Perm Territory ranks third in the country in terms of the number of criminal cases on raider attacks (second only to Moscow and St. Petersburg) – law enforcement agencies are inactive. Raiders in the region captured and plundered the following enterprises: Dzerzhinsky Plant (the technology of imaginary bankruptcy was used), SPK Motovilikhinsky and CJSC UralAgro (the invaders poisoned the workers of these two enterprises with tear gas, many needed medical attention, serious harm was caused to health ), OJSC "Trest No. 7" (first, a criminal case was opened against the general director, and then forceful pressure was put on him), an agricultural enterprise LLC "Ural" (700 people remained unemployed. In 2008, police officers of the region committed 1,775 official misconduct (abuse of official position, bribes, forgeries) compared to 1540 in 2007 (15% increase). requires an increase in disclosure rates at any cost, so even hypnosis was used (the case of the collector Schurman).Against this background, the criminogenic situation in the region deteriorated sharply: in 2008, compared to 2007, the number of those convicted for intentionally causing moderate harm to health increased by 20 %, for causing minor bodily harm (beatings) - by 32%, for torturing - by 21%, for threatening to kill and causing grievous bodily harm - by 16%. The newspaper “Gazeta” (04.09.2009, “Corruption has become part of organized crime”) reported that the number of corruption crimes is steadily growing. During the first half of 2009, 31.4 thousand criminal cases were initiated on misappropriation and embezzlement, more than 9 thousand on bribery and 1.3 thousand on commercial bribery. Basically, their defendants were the heads of municipalities, as well as employees of various registration, supervisory, educational and medical institutions. The number of cases brought against high-ranking officials has increased. The number of corruption crimes among investigators of the Ministry of Internal Affairs also increased more than three times. According to Matveyev, this year 63 criminal cases were initiated against them (in the first half of 2008 - 19). Of these, 19 - for bribes, 6 - for abuse, 8 - for falsification of evidence, 5 - for abuse of authority. Nezavisimaya Gazeta (dated September 11, 2009, “The average size of a bribe in Russia has tripled”) reports: the average size of a bribe in Russia has almost tripled compared to last year and amounted to more than 27,000 rubles. According to the Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation E. Shkolov, the fight against corruption in Russia is not yet effective enough. “The results of the fight against corruption by law enforcement agencies, despite the measures taken, do not correspond to the scale of the spread of this evil and do not fully meet the expectations of society. And this indicates that the fight against corruption is not only legal, but also political.” For six months, units for combating economic crimes revealed 1.5 times more corruption-related crimes. It is possible to continue listing the crimes committed by law enforcement officers, however, if you look at what is happening in law enforcement agencies and special services in general, a disappointing conclusion suggests itself that such an accentuated media attention on “werewolves in uniform” and on the lawlessness perpetrated by them will have the following Consequences: - Sets the population against the "guardians of the order", which in the future, with ever-increasing socio-economic tension, may result in clashes with law enforcement agencies. Because all crimes by representatives of law enforcement agencies characterize the state of affairs in the entire hierarchy of “authorities.” “It reduces the already low trust of the people in law enforcement agencies. It instills in "ordinary" people the idea that there is nothing to be done about the venality of officials and representatives of the law. Today in Russia, not only law enforcement agencies are affected by corruption. Almost the entire bureaucracy of Russia is affected by corruption.

The newspaper "AiF" (dated September 30, 2009, "Sochi - corruption =?") found out how budgetary funds are spent on the construction of facilities for the Sochi Olympiad. It turns out that the cost of Olympic facilities can be lower from 15 to 50%. Such a difference, according to "AN", consists of three components: corruption, the lack of healthy competition and the lack of modern technology. The estimate for the 2014 Olympics (about $12-14 billion) exceeds the average cost of hosting the Winter Olympics in Vancouver ($1.9 billion), Turin ($4.1 billion), Salt Lake City ( 1.3 billion dollars) by 3-10 times. Of course, these cities did not have to be rebuilt from scratch, unlike Sochi, where the bulk of the funds go to roads and energy. Most of the funds go through state corporations, and practice shows that their projects cost twice as much. The procedure for selecting a contractor for state orders remains confusing and non-transparent. This applies not only to Sochi. In Russia, government orders and government tenders are often accompanied by kickbacks. Overestimation of the cost of 4 objects in Sochi by 7.5 billion rubles has already been revealed. (about 2% of the total cost of the Olympics). It can be assumed that this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Pavel Goryachkin, President of the Union of Estimating Engineers, said: “During the construction of about 85% of Russian roads, financial violations can be found: “left” amounts are attributed in the estimates and the volume of work performed is overestimated. But this is the people's money from the state treasury! The high cost of the routes is explained by the fact that we take into account the resettlement of people living on the construction site, the purchase of land, etc. And foreigners, they say, consider only building materials. Our road builders are lying. Their foreign colleagues fit in the amount (at least three times less than ours) and the purchase of land, and the construction work themselves, and what we never dreamed of - parking equipment and even the installation of telephones

Novaya Gazeta (dated August 12, 2009, “And who is unwell here?”) writes about the idiocy of officials who decided to purchase hats made of elite fur for patients in neuropsychiatric boarding schools. According to documents published on the Internet, the patients of the boarding school require 100 expensive hats. “The main condition is that they must be sewn “exclusively from natural mink or arctic fox”. “Completely from whole fur, and in no case from pieces,” the terms of reference emphasize separately. Specific models and prices are also named here. For the most expensive - "Russian earflaps" - the initiators of the auction are ready to pay 9 thousand rubles apiece. They plan to buy 60 earflaps. Simpler models - “Kubanki with a tail” and classic ones - cost 5-6 thousand rubles. In total, the psycho-neurological boarding school needed 20 such headgear. The most budgetary - "Monomakhs with ears" (20 pieces) - will take 4,500 rubles for one headdress. In total, the city authorities intend to spend about 750 thousand rubles on fashionable hats for the mentally ill. In total, by autumn, the administration of PNI No. 2 in Moscow intended to acquire various underwear and clothes for 705 wards in the amount of more than 6.5 million rubles. Solid costs are explained not only by the cost of expensive furs. In addition to them, patients are also promised other wardrobe items: summer and winter shoes, underwear and underwear, weekend and casual clothes. Standard set: socks, shirts, nightgowns, mittens, scarves. Nothing pretentious, except for hats, which not even all working fashionistas can afford. “- This is the request of the sick,” explains the need for an expensive order. director of PNI No. 2 Konstantin Kuzminov. What else should they wear? We have 100-150 people regularly go to museums, theaters, like to drink coffee at McDonald's, go to the supermarket. I cannot allow them to walk in sheepskin. two years ago, the psycho-neurological boarding school No. 2, which ordered furs, was in general under the threat of closure. According to the results of the fire inspection (after the tragedy in Moscow, which claimed the lives of 45 people), it turned out that PNI No. 2, as well as PNI No. 3, orphanage-boarding school No. 1 and psycho-neurological research institute. Ankylosing spondylitis do not fully comply with fire safety requirements. The inspectors were preparing to take to court cases on the termination of the activities of all four hospitals. Because they believed: the situation is so deplorable that the "violators" are not able to correct it on their own. This will require huge financial investments, which medical institutions do not have. In March 2007, a fire broke out in PNI No. 3, 30 people were evacuated, but many people got out of the burning building on their own. Nobody, fortunately, died. However, to what extent the boarding school buildings meet the requirements of firefighters is an open question today.” Meanwhile, the money goes to the purchase of expensive hats, and not to the solution of elementary issues of vital needs, people in need of help. Returning to law enforcement agencies, we note another procurement scandal that broke out in St. Petersburg at the end of July 2009. This time, the police poked fun at the money of the federal budget. The automobile fleet of the Central Internal Affairs Directorate of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region announced a tender for the supply of cars for police officers for a total amount of more than 20 million rubles. The requests were serious: the policemen needed new cars - 2009, with leather interiors, eucalyptus wood trim, climate control, a music package, a "smoker's package", a leather-trimmed steering wheel. The organizers of the competition especially noted the obligatory presence in future official cars of an audio system with a color display, Bluetooth function and 8 speakers. The cost of the lots was also supposed to include extended CASCO insurance against theft and accidents (!). The list of cars needed by the Central Internal Affairs Directorate included: two Mercedes Benz E300 cars for 2.5 million rubles each, a Volvo XC90 SUV for 2.4 million rubles, three Toyota Camry worth 881 thousand rubles, 1 million 257 thousand rubles and 1 million 762 thousand, one IVECO truck for 4.5 million rubles and relatively cheap buses "KavZ-4235" and Ford Transit for 2.1 million and 1.4 million rubles, respectively. Also, the Central Internal Affairs Directorate needed a sweeper for 1,250,000 rubles. And one of the lots of the competition was a trailer for transporting a boat, at a price of 240 thousand rubles. It was after the publication of this budget order that a scandal was raised, as a result of which, by August 10, 2009, the conditions for the tender for the purchase of vehicles by the police department of the Central Internal Affairs Directorate were changed. The organizers of the purchase moderated their appetite and abandoned expensive cars, leaving only the essentials on the list: buses, a trailer for boats, a sweeper and one Toyota for 1 million 257 thousand rubles. The amount of expenses for cars decreased from 20 million 790 thousand rubles to 6 million 247 thousand. The newspaper "Novaya" (dated October 5, 2009, "Gold Rush") reported that the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation is equipping the interiors of the Reception House, which is not inferior in luxury to the palaces of the French kings.

As you can see, the situation with the state of corruption in Russia is very difficult. Corruption affects all authorities, from city clinics to ministries.

§6 Anti-corruption methods

The problems of combating corruption in the country are of particular relevance in modern conditions due to the need to implement the main socio-economic priorities of Russia in 2006-2009, set out in the Message of the President of the Russian Federation to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation in 2006: increasing the birth rate, reducing mortality and conducting an effective migration politicians. Organizing an effective fight against corruption requires not only the concentration of all existing legal mechanisms, but also the development of fundamentally new approaches.

If we talk about the priorities for considering issues related to the improvement of anti-corruption activities, then the following set of them seems reasonable:

1. Development and implementation of a set of measures to increase the level of the internal culture of the individual and strengthen the moral and ethical principles of a person, especially children and youth.

2. Development and adoption of the concept of anti-corruption policy.

3. Prompt adoption of the Law "Fundamentals of Legislation on Anti-Corruption Policy".

4. Formation of economic and civil public institutions that make it possible to achieve greater attractiveness of an honest and conscientious public service compared to the prospect of entering into corrupt ties and communities.

5. Determination of the place of anti-corruption measures in the administrative and economic reform, as well as the reform of the entire civil service and the education system. Development and subsequent implementation of a system of such measures.

6. Elimination of gaps in the legal field associated with the lack of clear interpretations and definitions of acts of corruption and their signs in the conceptual apparatus of jurisprudence, allowing to objectively evaluate and classify certain processes in various spheres of public life. Legal consolidation of the definition of the term "corruption".

7. Ensuring the most complete reflection in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation of the norms of the UN Convention against Corruption (2003), which refers to criminal corruption primarily: bribery of officials representing national and international public organizations; theft, misappropriation or other diversion of property by a public official; abuse of influence for personal gain; abuse of office; bribery in the private sector; theft of property in the private sector; laundering of proceeds of crime; obstruction of justice; illicit enrichment (i.e. a significant increase in the assets of an official in excess of his legal income, which he can justify in various ways).

8. Formation of an effective system of taxation. Development of effective mechanisms to ensure the inevitability of the implementation of the responsibility of taxpayers, the transparency of the financial activities of individuals and legal entities, undermining the financial foundations of corruption.

9. Development of international cooperation to solve the problems of combating national and transnational corruption, taking into account ongoing economic integration processes at the global level and a high degree of criminalization of foreign economic activity.

Thus, the improvement of anti-corruption activities should be associated with the comprehensive implementation of legal, political, organizational, technical and financial measures that ensure the development of the necessary mechanisms, the implementation of which will create serious prerequisites for a radical change in the situation in the field of combating large-scale manifestations of corruption.

Conclusion

From the moment when corruption began to slow down the development of not only individual countries, but the entire world economy (from about the 1980s), methods and approaches to combat this phenomenon came to the fore and began to be seriously developed. At the same time, the goals that they sought to achieve were different - from the desire to accelerate economic growth to the desire to restore social justice. Among the most commonly used ways to fight corruption are legal reforms, which include both tougher penalties and measures to reduce the number of situations where corruption occurs (for example, tax cuts or fewer inspections). Of course, state reforms alone will not be effective without the support of society. Therefore, in order to achieve real success in the fight against corruption, it is necessary to increase the dependence of the state on citizens. This requires long-term reforms to reduce the bureaucracy, create independent institutions to investigate allegations of corruption, and improve the very ethical culture of civil servants. In addition, one of the effective methods of combating corruption is the complete (or partial reduction) of the benefits from not fulfilling their direct official duties, as well as increasing pay or remuneration for their successful performance. Experts also note the need for public control over the identification of cases of bribery in government institutions, coverage of cases of disclosure of cases related to corruption of officials, as well as the adoption of nationwide programs aimed at combating this phenomenon. In addition, it is very important to maintain a general atmosphere of intolerance towards corruption among the population. In those government bodies that have distribution functions (say, the distribution of land plots or contracts), the auction method of distribution should be introduced. Thus, it is possible to significantly reduce the interest of officials in the object of distribution. The experience of fighting corruption in other countries suggests that the essential way to fight is the confiscation of property from a person convicted of this type of crime, as well as the removal of parliamentary immunity. There are many ways, however, experts tend to think. That today there are no one hundred percent methods of combating corruption.

Bibliography

1 Satarov G.A., Levin M.I. Russia and corruption: who wins? // Russian newspaper. 1998. 19 Feb.

2 Organized Crime - 3 / Ed. A.I.Dolgova, S.V.Dyakova. Moscow: Criminological Association, 1996.

3 Newspaper "Novaya" (dated October 5, 2009, "Gold Rush")

4 Newspaper "AiF" (from 2.09.09, "Officers - for self-sufficiency")

5. Newspaper "Kommersant" (dated September 25, 2009, "Russian corruption does not indulge in diversity")

6 "Novaya Gazeta" (dated July 13, 2009, "Bablosbornik")

7 Newspaper "AiF" (from 30.09.09, "Sochi - corruption =?")

8 Corruption as a threat to national security: methodology, problems and solutions. Khabibulin A.G. Journal of Russian Law, 2007.

9 Diagnostics of Russian corruption: a sociological analysis1

Satarov G.A., President of the Indem Foundation

10 Edelev A.L. Corruption as a systemic threat to the stability and economic security of the Russian Federation//Taxes. 2008. Special issue. January.

11 Golovshchinsky K. I. Diagnostics of the corruption potential of legislation. / Ed. G. A. Satarova and M. A. Krasnova.

12 WCIOP - Singapore Anti-Corruption Strategy

applications

Every year, the international organization TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL publishes data on the level of corruption in various countries. Corruption perception index (CPI) helps to assess corruption in the country.

This indicator is calculated for each country or territory and reflects the perception of the level of corruption in the public sector by entrepreneurs and experts in a given country and evaluates it on a scale from 10 (virtually no corruption) to 0 (very high level of corruption). According to this organization, Russia's corruption perception index did not rise above 2.8 points from 2001 to 2008.

As can be seen from the table and graph, from 2006 until 2008, the corruption perception index in Russia tends to zero, which means that the level of corruption in Russia is increasing every year.

Thus, the high level of corruption in Russia is caused by bribery, which in Russia has received "monstrous proportions."

Corruption in Russia is invincible: poll

In the near future, the fight against corruption in Russia is supposed to be taken to a fundamentally new level - on July 31, the President of the country signed the National Anti-Corruption Plan. According to the current government, the implementation of this plan will make it much more effective to deal with the use by officials of their powers for personal gain.

Assessing which part of Russian officials is subject to corruption, 16% of Russians said that everyone is corrupt, 46% - that the majority; 22% believe that half of the apparatus of officials is involved in the relevant practices. The answer "minority" was given by very few (5%), the option "none" was not chosen at all.

Such data is published by the Public Opinion Foundation based on the results of a survey conducted in 44 constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

Over the past year or two, corruption among officials has increased - 45% of respondents think so. 7%, on the contrary, are sure that it has decreased (33% do not see changes, the rest find it difficult to answer). These data practically repeat the results of the survey conducted in March 2008; then, for the first time in the last 10 years, less than half of the respondents reported an increase in corrupt practices. At the end of the last decade, this figure exceeded 70%, in 2002-2006 it was already 54-60%.

The majority of Russians (57%) believe that corruption in Russia is invincible, 29% believe that it can be eradicated.

In light of the fact that the fight against corrupt officials in Russia, thanks to the signing of the National Anti-Corruption Plan, is becoming more systematic, it seems important to find out the degree of awareness of Russian citizens about this policy document. More than half of the respondents (53%) hear for the first time that Dmitry Medvedev has signed the National Anti-Corruption Action Plan, 30% have heard something about it; said that they "know" about this fact, only 13% of Russians found it difficult to assess their awareness of 4%. An open question about the measures envisaged in the program document was asked to everyone who had heard anything about it, but only 15% of the respondents answered it - a third of those to whom it was asked. They mainly talked about tougher penalties for corruption in general (5%), increased control over officials (3%), confiscation of property and sending corrupt officials to jail (1%), activation of law enforcement agencies and courts (1%), tightening of anti-corruption legislation (1%), etc. Some mentioned the declaration of income of officials (1%) and the increase in their salaries (1%). And 2% of respondents limited themselves to expressing pessimism about the effectiveness of any measures to combat corruption.

Being little aware of the existence of the National Anti-Corruption Plan, and even more so of its content, the respondents do not yet have an established opinion about the prospects of the policy document. 35% of Russians believe that the implementation of the National Plan will lead to a decrease in the level of corruption in Russia, 34% - that this will not happen (most pessimists are among residents of the capital - 44%); 31% of respondents found it difficult to answer.

1500 people took part in the survey. The statistical error does not exceed 3.6%.