Administrative and legal methods of preventing corruption among public authorities: the experience of EU countries

Stanislav Zlyvko; Viacheslav Puzyrnyi; Svitlana Nishchymna; Oleksandr Tkachenko; Oleksandr Samofalov

doi:10.34069/AI/2023.71.11.7

Stanislav Zlyvko Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2732-3144
Viacheslav Puzyrnyi Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5692-2990
Svitlana Nishchymna Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7424-7688
Oleksandr Tkachenko Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5640-0906
Oleksandr Samofalov Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9157-7435

DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.71.11.7

Keywords: corruption, quality of government, good governance, EU, prevention

Abstract

The study deals with the analysis of administrative and legal methods used in EU countries to fight corruption among public authorities. Fighting corruption is critically important for ensuring transparency and accountability, good governance, and achieving the effectiveness of management actions. The aim of the article is to determine the effectiveness of administrative and legal methods used in the EU countries to fight corruption among public authorities based on the implementation of the good governance principles. The research methodology provided for the use of the methods of contextual analysis, comparison, and graphic correlation. The study outlined the necessary measures: improving legislation on the status of public authorities, the responsibility of public officials, introducing egovernance models and the concept of Good governance among public authorities of EU member states. It was found that the application of administrative and legal methods in the system of public administration is not enough for the implementation of anti-corruption policy, because corruption in the EU goes beyond the borders of one country and its law enforcement. In view of the expanding manifestations of corruption, implementation of effective administrative and legal methods of fighting corruption is an urgent task for public authorities and leading EU institutions. The specified will require a systemic approach, robust anticorruption institutions, and the establishment of legal anti-corruption mechanisms.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Stanislav Zlyvko, Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine.

Doctor of Sciences (Law), Professor, Department of Administrative, Civil and Commercial Law and Process, Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine.

Viacheslav Puzyrnyi, Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine.

Doctor of Sciences (Law), Vice Rector for Scientific and Academic Affairs, Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine.

Svitlana Nishchymna, Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine.

Doctor of Sciences (Law), Head of the Department of Administrative, Civil and Commercial Law and Process, Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine.

Oleksandr Tkachenko, Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine.

Ph.D. in Law, Head of the Department of Formation and Development of Professional Competences of the Personnel of the SCES of Ukraine, Institute of Professional Development, Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine.

Oleksandr Samofalov, Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine.

Ph.D. in Law, Associate Professor, Department of Administrative, Civil and Commercial Law and Process, Academy of the State Penitentiary Service, Chernihiv, Ukraine.

References

Agarwal, A., & Maiti, D. (2020). ICTs and Effectiveness of Governance: A Cross-Country Study. In: D. Maiti, F. Castellacci & A. Melchior (Eds.), Digitalisation and Development (pp. 321-343). Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9996-1_12

Armand, A., Coutts, A., Vicente, P. C., & Vilela, I. (2023). Measuring corruption in the field using behavioral games. Journal of Public Economics, 218, 104799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2022.104799

Bozóki, A., & Hegedűs, D. (2018). An externally constrained hybrid regime: Hungary in the European Union. Democratization, 25(7), 1173-1189. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2018.1455664

Castro, C., & Lopes, C. (2022). Digital government and sustainable development. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 13(2), 880-903. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00749-2

Chen, L., & Aklikokou, A. K. (2021). Relating e-government development to government effectiveness and control of corruption: a cluster analysis. Journal of Chinese Governance, 6(1), 155-173. https://doi.org/10.1080/23812346.2019.1698693

Chong, S. P. C., Tee, C. M., & Cheng, S. V. (2020). Political institutions and the control of corruption: A cross-country evidence. Journal of Financial Crime, 28(1), 25-48. https://doi.org/10.1108/jfc-05-2020-0094

Di Mascio, F., Maggetti, M., & Natalini, A. (2020). Exploring the dynamics of delegation over time: Insights from Italian anti‐corruption agencies (2003–2016). Policy Studies Journal, 48(2), 367-400. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12253

European Commission. (2023a). Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating corruption. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2023%3A234%3AFIN

European Commission. (2023b). Joint Communication to the European Parliament, the Council and the European economic and social committee on the fight against corruption. Retrieved from https://commission.europa.eu/system/files/2023-05/JOIN_2023_12_1_EN.pdf

European Union. (1997). Convention drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 (2) (c) of the Treaty on European Union on the fight against corruption involving officials of the European Communities or officials of Member States of the European Union. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/zxUhH3

European Union. (2008). Council Decision 2008/852/JHA of 24 October 2008 on a contact-point network against corruption. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/picHf7

European Union. (2012). Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Union. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/pCE1CW

European Union. (2022). Corruption. Eurobarometer. Retrieved from https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2658

European Union. (2023). EU legislation on anti-corruption. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/ZgzII9

Gallego-Álvarez, I., Rodríguez-Rosa, M., & Vicente-Galindo, P. (2021). Are worldwide governance indicators stable or do they change over time? a comparative study using multivariate analysis. Mathematics, 9(24), 3257. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9243257

Gorsira, M., Steg, L., Denkers, A., & Huisman, W. (2018). Corruption in organizations: Ethical climate and individual motives. Administrative Sciences, 8(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci8010004

Johnston, M., & Heidenheimer, A. (2017). Political Corruption: Concepts and Contexts. New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315126647

Kasa, R., Réthi, G., Hauber, G., & Szegedi, K. (2023). Simulation of corruption decisions – An agent-based approach. Sustainability, 15(3), 2561. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032561

Lührmann, A., & Lindberg, S. I. (Eds.). (2020). Autocratization Surges – Resistance Grows. Democracy Report 2020. V-DEM. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/NZrOJN

Mao, Z., Yao, H., Zou, Q., Zhang, W., & Dong, Y. (2021). Digital contact tracing based on a graph database algorithm for emergency management during the COVID-19 epidemic: Case study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth, 9(1), e26836. https://doi.org/10.2196/26836

Qu, G., Slagter, B., Sylwester, K., & Doiron, K. (2019). Explaining the standard errors of corruption perception indices. Journal of Comparative Economics, 47(4), 907-920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jce.2019.07.003

Rose-Ackerman, S. (2018). Corruption & purity. Daedalus, 147(3), 98-110. https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_00505

Silal, P., Jha, A., & Saha, D. (2023). Examining the role of E-government in controlling corruption: A longitudinal study. Information & Management, 60(1), 103735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2022.103735

Transparency International. (2023a). Corruption perceptions index 2022. Retrieved from https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2022

Transparency International. (2023b). CPI 2022 For Western Europe & EU: undue influence and fragmented anti-corruption measures hurt progress. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/oQOp6J

United Nations. (2020). E-Government survey 2020 – digital government in the decade of action for sustainable development. Retrieved from https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3884686?ln=ru

United Nations. (2022). E-government survey 2022. The Future of Digital Government. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/2FVcv5

von Der Leyen, U. G. (2022). State of the Union Address by President von der Leyen. European Commission. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/Inq6Vt

World Bank. (2023). Worldwide Governance Indicators. Retrieved from https://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/

World Justice Project. (2020). Rule of Law Index 2020. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/pYgizO

Zou, Q., Mao, Z., Yan, R., Liu, S., & Duan, Z. (2023). Vision and reality of e-government for governance improvement: Evidence from global cross-country panel data. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 194, 122667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122667