NORMATIVE AND LEGAL COMPONENT IN CORRUPTION-PREVENTING ISSUES

Abstract

Problem setting. The article focuses on changes in the national anti-corruption legislation, the reasons for the low anti-corruption dynamics in Ukraine, the international experience of fighting corruption and the main ways to solve the problem of high corruption level are analysed.

Target of research. The purpose of the study is a comprehensive, in-depth analysis of innovations in the current legislation that regulates legal relations in connection with the commission of corruption offenses and offenses related to corruption, search for existing deficiencies in it and provide suggestions for their solution.

Analysis of recent researches and publications. The problem of corruption in all expressions, its causes and methods of overcoming attracts a large number of scholars such as: Melnyk M. I., Khavronyuk M. I., Seryogin S. M., Onyschuk O. O. and others. These studies use A fundamental approach to study all aspects and nuances of corruption, which is mainly used in their works, can serve as a benchmark for other systematic studies of this problem.

Article’s main body. The concept of corruption is complex and multifaceted, which should be considered in the complex of the relevant features. In particular, corruption: firstly, it is a system of relations, which includes representatives of all authorities, secondly, it is a certain psychological state of a person associated with violation of mandatory rules, thirdly, it is a social-negative phenomenon that affects the functioning of public institutions and, most importantly, the concept of corruption is not reduced to bribery.

 One of the most effective means of regulating the prevention of corruption is to control the finances of a person by submitting electronic declarations of persons authorized to perform functions of the state or local self-government, monitoring the submission and verification of the said declaration. However, the Law of Ukraine «On Prevention of Corruption» also emphasizes other mechanisms for preventing corruption. In particular, the prohibition on obtaining privileges, services and property by state authorities and local self-government bodies; anti-corruption expertise; special check; the existence of a single state register of persons who committed corruption or corruption-related offenses; transparency and access to information requirements.

The given legal analysis in the article suggests that the actions of the legislator are aimed at improving anti-corruption policy, in particular, attention is paid to eliminating certain conflicts and gaps that exist in anti-corruption legislation, its adaptation to the requirements of European standards. At the same time, there are still many unresolved issues that require legal clarity and attention from the legislator. Means of successful fight against corruption should provide mutually coordinated interaction of state authorities at all levels. Unfortunately, experience shows that Ukraine has not reached such a stage of development yet, in which the interaction between the authorities would lead to significant changes in the anti-corruption policy. Therefore, it is imperative to consider the mechanisms of combating corruption, which are successfully applied and operate in other countries of the world.

Conclusions and prospects for the development. Specific changes in the legislative framework of Ukraine should primarily concern the formation of bodies that carry out anti-corruption activities, and, accordingly, their accountability should be changed. All the anticorruption structures should be subordinated directly to the President of Ukraine as a guarantor of the observance of the Constitution, the rights and freedoms of a man and a citizen and accountable to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine as the people's constituents. The President of Ukraine should have the authority to appoint an official to an anti-corruption body for any position, whether it is an ordinary position or a post of chairman. Such changes will reduce the sense of impunity for those who deal with corruption, increase their responsibility to the people and stop the conflicts between actors of anticorruption policy.