Counteraction of corruption in Russia. National Anti-Corruption Plan

Corruption is present in most economies of the world, including the most developed and organized countries. In states whose economic system undergoes a stage of formation, such phenomena are sometimes not just perceptible, they directly affect the prospects for political development. In Russia, corruption forms the problem recognized by many experts and public figures, which, depending on the scale of the issues involved, will probably have to be solved by the state. What are the practical tools of the Russian authorities in counteracting this phenomenon? What sources of law are at the core of the activities of the agencies related to this direction of the public administration system?

The relevance of counteracting corruption

Anti-corruption must be implemented, of course, in any country in the world. However, the fight with this phenomenon is of particular importance for states with developing socioeconomic systems in transit, to search for their own way of development, to which, in all likelihood, Russia also belongs.

Effective counteraction to corruption in our country is one of the prerequisites for further modernization of the political system, improving the economic model so that crisis trends are not so noticeable as it is observed in a number of areas today. The most important criterion is the conduct of a corresponding policy at the level of the highest authorities, that is, in the aspect of developing and implementing the laws that regulate anti-corruption measures. There are such sources of law in Russia. Let's study their essence.

Anticorruption laws

Among the sources of law governing anti-corruption policy issues, it is worth noting:

• FZ "On Counteracting Corruption";
• The national plan signed by the President of the Russian Federation;

We will begin to study their features from the second source, since its promulgation preceded the adoption of the first. Counteraction of corruption in the Russian Federation (according to the document) is a necessity caused by the fact that such negative phenomena hamper the Russian economy and society to develop effectively. We will study the structure of the National Plan.

National plan

The document in question consists of several sections. The first refers to the need to develop legislative measures aimed at combating corruption. It should be noted that the adoption of the Federal Law, which we named above, was announced precisely in the National Plan. In the first section of the document, a definition was made of what is the counteraction to corruption, what kind of activities should be carried out within the framework of relevant activities and by whom. Also in this part of the document were set out the necessary tasks facing the state. Consider this aspect in more detail - it is, as many experts believe, that it is one of the key in the general spectrum of government anti-corruption initiatives.

State anti-corruption policy

Thus, the Russian state, in the person of the highest power institutions, has largely taken up the issue of countering corruption. The National Plan, which we are currently considering, outlined the following conceptual theses, reflecting the directions of work in this area. We list the main:

• Improvement of the structure of government bodies, optimization of the powers entrusted to each;
• The need to develop measures to combat corruption at the level of the formation of environments in which employees of state and municipal bodies fulfill their work and official duties;
• Approval of a specific kind of anti-corruption standards depending on the specific sphere of social activity;
• Guaranteeing the accessibility of justice, improving the mechanisms for resolving disputes in pre-trial order.

Also, a number of experts consider the improvement of key legislative acts, such as, for example, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, with an emphasis on tightening sanctions related to corruption offenses, as the most important direction of the state anti-corruption policy (as indicated in the relevant section of the National Plan).

In search of the perfection of the system

The next element of the structure of the National Plan is section number two. It outlined the essence of what measures should be taken to combat corruption, reflecting the very mechanism for improving the structures of public administration. What kind of activities were noted in this section of the National Plan? Mainly, it was supposed to concentrate efforts in the areas of using state and municipal property, stimulating competition in the economy, improving the mechanisms of state purchases and state contracts, developing intradepartmental models for identifying corruption phenomena.

A lawyer must be qualified

The next group of measures, which contains the National Anti-Corruption Plan, is set out in the third section of the document and is related to the improvement of professional training in the field of jurisprudence, as well as the work to enhance the legal culture of Russian citizens. Thus, two areas of work were identified here. Within the framework of the first one (in terms of improving the skills of the staff), it was expected that the state control over the work of educational institutions preparing lawyers would be strengthened in the first place. In the second direction of work it was planned that the population of the Russian Federation will have the opportunity to replenish their knowledge in the field of legal issues through specialized media resources.

the federal law

In 2008, the Federal Law on Combating Corruption (within the framework of the practical implementation of one of the areas of work set out in the National Plan) was adopted. In fact, many of the theses that we outlined above have received the corresponding legal status at the official level. Therefore, we will not go deep into the theory, but we will turn to practical nuances concerning law enforcement practices reflecting the effect of the FZ in question.

Ambiguity interpretations

There is a thesis that the Federal Law in question contains norms in such formulations that their practical application in a number of cases can be carried out selectively (and sometimes the relevant provisions can be interpreted ambiguously). That is, legal counteraction to corruption is directed, as some experts believe, in many respects to achieve some resonant effects observed on examples of high-profile cases and demonstrative lawsuits, but systemically, problems are resolved very mediocrely.

There is another group of problems. In some cases, authorities participating in law enforcement practice under the Federal Law in question apply its norms from a formal point of view, it is true, but in fact it is not entirely appropriate.

For example, there is a case where several large Russian airlines hiring former government employees forgot to notify their previous employers about it, violating the norms of the law, and were therefore fined. The sphere of combating corruption, according to some analysts, should not make exceptions in the aspect of fixing offenses and responding to them. However, the accents in conducting relevant activities by the competent authorities should be placed as competently as possible. That is, for example, if all available personnel and organizational resources of departments are sent to identify incorrectly drawn labor contracts, there will be simply no one to engage in real, meaningful violations.

Statistics should be correct

Another aspect is statistics. If it is made on the basis of precedents, similar to those that were recorded in the case of airlines - it's understandable, the relevant figures can not be interpreted as reflecting the authorities' success in implementing anti-corruption policies. It is necessary that statistical information reflecting the results of relevant activities be representative. And this depends, analysts believe, not only on the wording in the law, but on the ability of competent departments to correctly place the emphasis in their activities. Although, there is an opposite view on this matter. It is based on the priority of the mechanism of reading, and not on the interpretation of laws. That is, those fines that were imposed on the airlines are fully justified (based on the direct norms specified in the sources of law). All questions, therefore, should be addressed to the legislator.

Business Commitments

It is interesting that the plan of anti-corruption measures set forth at the level of federal legislation obliges not only state but also other institutions not directly related to the system of power to participate in the practical improvement of the social and economic environment in the aspect of combating this negative phenomenon. First of all, it's business. Companies, according to a number of provisions in the sources of law, are obliged to develop and implement preventive measures related to counteracting corruption. Which for example? Alternatively, an enterprise can develop an internal regulation on combating corruption, develop a code of ethics that reflects the communication of employees with state authorities.

At the same time, as some lawyers say, the responsibility for non-compliance with the prescription in question is not clearly defined in the sources of law. This, by the way, is another example of insufficient, in the opinion of a number of experts, the elaboration of legislation. Indeed, if an enterprise, say, did not organize an anti-corruption department in its structure, or, say, refused to draft a code of ethics - no agency, based on the norms of the law, has the right to oblige the company to take the necessary actions. But, one way or another, to execute their company is obliged. It can do this, for example, using the developed recommendations on combating corruption, which is a list of key principles that it makes sense to adhere to businesses that want to deal with the negative phenomenon in question. But, as we have already said above, enterprises have the right to develop their own local norms of the appropriate purpose - to create, for example, a provision, or an order to counteract corruption.

What can I give?

Let us turn to the study of the practice of applying specific provisions of the Federal Law "On Combating Corruption". The most interesting instructions are contained in Article 17 of the law. It says that an official does not have the right to receive remuneration for the performance of his functions, expressed in cash, gifts and other preferences. If, however, a citizen or an entrepreneur did present a certain value to the state servant, he is obliged to transfer it to the federal property, having issued it in accordance with the relevant act. But there is an exception: if the cost of a gift is less than 3 thousand rubles.

What will happen if the official receives a value, the value of which is known (with a high probability) exceeds the established amount? In this case, it can be qualified as the receipt of a bribe by an official (and the transfer thereof, respectively, by an individual or an organization). The result - most likely, an infamous penalty will be issued against the offenders.

Anticorruption policy: foreign experience

How is anti-corruption policy organized in other countries? Some experts recommend paying attention to Hong Kong. Working in this country, the Commission on Anti-Corruption, according to many analysts, is one of the most effective organs in the world of its profile. This agency has developed a number of theses and recommendations concerning the implementation of effective measures in the direction of combating corruption phenomena. They are applicable, experts believe, not only in a single country in the world, but practically in any modern state. What do anti-corruption experts from Hong Kong offer? Literally the following:

• Bodies responsible for anti-corruption policy should be independent of the executive branch, excluding the highest official of the state; In the case of Russia, this is the president - only relevant departments should be accountable to him;
• In the direction of personnel policy in the public service should respect the principle of selecting the most worthy candidates and retaining the best specialists;
• Bodies responsible for combating corruption must have greater powers to disclose possible offenses;
• In the country there should be a system of strict public oversight of the work of the agency responsible for the relevant area of work;
• The activities of anti-corruption bodies should be commensurate with the capabilities of the country's budget.

How much is the Russian National Anti-Corruption Plan similar to the corresponding recommendations from Hong Kong? A unambiguous trend reflecting the opinions prevailing in the expert community is difficult to detect. But if we study individual provisions of the Federal Law, as well as the National Plan, then a certain similarity of the criteria set forth in the Russian sources of law and wording, which we cited above, can still be fixed. For example, theses concerning personnel are very similar in the Russian and Hong Kong versions.

The social factor

What can the practical success of the state anti-corruption policy depend on? Experts believe that this is largely determined by the authorities' ability to build a dialogue with society as a whole or in its separate environments. It often happens that the emergence of new legislative norms aimed at combating corruption is accompanied by the emergence of unnecessary bureaucracy in departments, sometimes in areas where such phenomena are undesirable. For example, in the field of education. Counteraction of corruption in school or kindergarten is a phenomenon, experts believe, which is not always appropriate to put on a par with the policy of preventive measures against authorities, related, for example, to budgetary tasks.

What should be the specialized body?

Despite the fact that in Russia the fight against corruption is a process regulated at the level of federal legislation, in our country there is still no separate body (as in the Hong Kong scenario), which would independently be responsible for implementing the relevant direction of state policy. There is the Office for Counteracting Corruption under the President of the Russian Federation, but it does not have the status of a separate government body. In the experts' environment, there is a thesis that such an agency would be expedient to create.

At the same time, according to analysts, the legislator should pay special attention to the issue of empowering such an authority. That is, for example, giving it the functions of a "police" character (arrests, etc.), the authorities can, with a certain probability, provoke disagreements between the activities of the employees of this department and the already existing power structures, experts believe.

It is important, analysts say, yet to focus on preemptive, not reactionary actions. Closely intersect such phenomena as economic security and counteracting corruption. That is, it is about ensuring that in practice not only compliance with the norms of the law was implemented, but also the interests of business structures that play a major role in the construction of the economic system of the state were observed. Recall the case with airlines - it would seem that the authority to hire employees is entirely entrusted to the internal structures of corporations. However, the law provides for a rule that allows the state on a legal basis, albeit in a limited regime (through fines), but still interfere in the affairs of a private company.

In the work of a single anti-corruption body, which may need to be created by the Russian legislator, the aspect of public control is important. Above, we noted that with an insufficiently balanced approach to the formulation of regulatory norms and unclear criteria in the aspect of law enforcement practice, there can be difficulties when, for example, the counteraction of corruption in school or even kindergarten (in terms of the norms of the law) is carried out according to procedures similar to those , Which are realized within the framework of activities in the sphere of interaction between government and business. Probably, analysts believe, it will be necessary to work out more detailed regulation of regulatory norms, at least for the reason that education workers, as a rule, are not civil servants or officials. Anti-corruption in the PFD, schools - the sphere, as lawyers believe, requiring the publication of fundamentally different sources of law. And this is also one of the tasks facing the Russian authorities.