www.werner-schulz-europa.eu 17 November 2011:Russiais one of the few countries that continually slide downwards in the annual rankings of Transparency International. Of the 187 countries assessed in

www.werner-schulz-europa.eu 17 November 2011: Russia is one of the few countries that continually slide downwards in the annual rankings of Transparency International. Of the 187 countries assessed in 2010, Russia placed 154th, sharing that rank with countries like Cambodia, Guinea and the Central African Republic. Yet Russian corruption is not merely an intensified form of venality, like the phenomenon we are familiar with from other countries: all of the social, political and economic problems that Russia has been subjected to from tsarist times to the present are bound up within it.

Georgy Satarov "Corruption is

merely a symptom of the

disease, not the disease itself"

Some of the speakers did count historically-rooted cultural factors among the causes of the critical situation with corruption in present-day Russia. Georgy Satarov, the president of the INDEM Foundation, an independent research institute promoting the development of democracy, argued that the poorly thought-out transformation of political institutions that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union left open many loopholes allowing individuals to enrich themselves with impunity. He described the weak civil society in Russia as continuing to represent a major problem.

Satarov described the scale of the corruption at the federal level in Russia as enormous, citing the Russian magazine "Expert", which reported in 2005 that 80% of the military's annual expenditure on research and development found its way into the pockets of Russian officials. He cited several examples, such as the possibility of buying one's way out of military service, purchasing a university diploma or special privileges, like the blue light for one's automobile. One case he described that was of particular gravity for the Russian state itself was a suicide bombing in 2004, in which the bombers bribed corrupt officials to get on board the airplanes that they proceeded to blow up. Satarov ascribed particular seriousness to the impacts of corruption in the health and education sectors, reporting that

12% of the Russian population can no longer afford to pay for

state-provided health services, which are supposed to be free, because of the bribes they would have to pay. A considerable proportion of students report having paid bribes to attain their place at university. Satarov identified the decreasing life expectancy in Russia and the declining quality of education as serious consequences of this wide-ranging corruption. The growing gap between the very few super rich and the vast numbers of persons with minimal incomes may, he said, cause the situation in Russian society to deteriorate. In his eyes, this means that one cannot rule out the possibility of great social upheaval in the near future. Satarov sees the main causes of the permanently increasing level of corruption as lying in the uncontrolled monopoly on power and in the inefficiency of the bureaucracy, as well as in the nearly complete lack of legal protection in Russia.

Alexander Lebedev believes that successfully combating corruption at the national level is not possible at the present time due to the absence of or inadequacy of independence of public prosecuting and judicial authorities.

Ivan Ninenko, representing the Russian section of Transparency International, sees the implementation of the laws as the major problem. Here, Ninenko echoed Satarov and Lebedev, criticising the corrupt system of criminal prosecution in his country. Ninenko pointed out that while classic corruption involves two interested parties making a deal in their

mutual interest, a feature of corruption specific to Russia

is that the Russian authorities demand a consideration

just to provide benefits to which their citizens are already entitled. Officials are not lacking in means to exert

pressure for this sort of extortion, ranging from threats of sanctions for genuine or trumped-up violations to threats of or actual incarceration of employees. The most prominent example, and a tragic one, Ninenko reported, is the case of Sergei Magnitsky, a lawyer working for the Hermitage Foundation. After uncovering a case of tax fraud involving 230 million dollars, Magnitsky was arrested and placed in pre-trial detention where he died almost a year later, having been subjected to violence and not provided with adequate medical care. Thus, Ninenko reported, protecting people who have the courage to expose cases of corruption is one of the key requirements for successfully combating corruption in Russia.

Werner Schulz

"It would appear that nothing ties

Russian society as tightly together as the ubiquitous principle of corruption"

Werner Schulz posed the question of why we have not seen substantive progress in the fight against corruption despite broad consensus among Russia's governing and opposition politicians that corruption represents a threat to Russia's system of government and the widespread agreement that every possible means must be used to combat it. The speakers also characterized as unrealistic the idea that Russia's political elite might start actively fighting corruption on its own initiative, realizing that it would destroy the country otherwise. For one thing, corruption extends to the highest level, they pointed out, and then too, the entanglements are so complex that tackling corruption would entail great difficulties just by virtue of how things are set up. At the same time, they said, the enormous scale of corruption is causing the state to dissolve. At any rate, Satarov said, it is clear that tackling corruption will be impossible until the political situation in Russia changes. The chances of even a restriction of its scope are low according to Saratov, particularly as there is no one who genuinely represents the public interest there. For the most part, Alexander Lebedev shared the attitude taken by Satarov. Under the current government there can be no improvement of the situation with corruption in Russia, as the judicial system is neither independent, nor effective, nor accessible, he said. Ivan Ninenko cited the population's attitude towards corruption as being of primary importance. That, he said, was fundamental to successfully combating this evil, since one cannot look to the state for changes in Russia. Ninenko emphasized that beneficial changes have been observed in recent times in this area: more and more people, he reported, are "actively" rejecting corruption and breaking out of the normal paths of corruption. Transparency International is attempting to support this trend through intensive educational activities.

imrussia.org Tuesday, 29 January 2013:

Transparency International has ranked Russia 133 rd in its recently-published 2012 Corruption Perceptions Index. 1 The previous year, Russia was ranked 143 rd. According to economist Alexandra Kalinina, despite the improved score, corruption in Russia remains “ not a problem, but a business. ”

There is also an interesting shift in the main focus of bribery: whereas previously officials took bribes to shut their eyes to legal infractions, they now take them simply to perform their duties.

Currently, most public purchases, public contracts and any other services that are done for the government or for state-owned enterprises involve bribes and kickbacks. Not surprisingly, the cost of public works in Russia (e.g. repair and building of roads and pipelines, construction of buildings, etc.) is much higher, sometimes several times higher, than in any other European country.

According to a 2010 survey of the relative influence of different groups in the Russian political system, conducted by the “Clean Hands” anticorruption center, power is concentrated mainly in hands of the “security forces” (the Federal Security Service, the Security Council, the Interior Ministry, the Federal Protective Service), with their index of influence on the political system equaling 55 percent. The second and third most influential entities are President Putin (13 percent) and organized crime (12 percent). All other groups (civil society, opposition, mass media, business, etc.) have a combined 20 percent rating in terms of political influence. This situation is dangerous both for society and the government. In effect, there is no political competition in Russia – the opposition only has a 2.5 percent influence on the political system, – and this permits corruption to flourish.

Yet another reason for corruption is that Russia’s judicial system is highly dependent on the government and subject to influence by its senior officials. Many court decisions are dictated by the executive. In cases where officials are convicted of accepting bribes, they usually receive conditional sentences. Severe sentences are reserved only for those who openly criticize the authorities.

Corruption at the highest levels results in the waste of government resources and the consequent inability to meet the population’s needs.

The Russian opposition and politically active public figures (journalists, artists, human rights activists, bloggers, etc.) should draft a detailed unified plan of action with the following aims:

1. Increasing the influence of independent mass media, so that a significantly higher percentage of Russians are able to receive truthful information, including about corruption;

2. Establishing a political party that would have significant public support in the 2016 parliamentary election; field candidates in municipal elections, creating a pool of new political leaders;

3. Involving a higher percentage of Russians (especially from the middle class) in social and civic projects. The Coordination Council of the Opposition should play an important role in consolidating these efforts and developing a strategy that includes fighting corruption;

4. Establishing a serious public anticorruption organization that will be able to cover the costs of the fight against graft.

· The independence of judges and the unavoidability of punishment for corrupt behavior;

· Amnesty for officials and oligarchs who will be ready to legalize their wealth and pay significant taxes on it;

· Transparency in government decision-making;

· Creation of a special independent anticorruption agency;

· Meritocracy – recruitment of government personnel on a competitive basis;

· Frequent rotation of officials, monitoring of corruption in all public offices;

· Creation of monetary and non-monetary incentives for officials who perform their duties honestly.

Changing the Russian education system would be another important step in fighting corruption and developing civil society. Starting at the school level, educational programs should change the perception of corruption and raise the level of general legal knowledge.

MISHA FRIEDMAN August 18, 2012:

CORRUPTION in Russia is so pervasive that the whole society accepts the unacceptable as normal, as the only way of survival, as the way things “just are. ”

16 November 2011 Pyotr Filippov: Another important factor contributing to the corruption is civic infantilism, the reliance on a 'strong leader'. Most people in Russia are untroubled by the castration of the system of checks and balances, which gives the bureaucracy a monopoly of power and makes it unaccountable to the people. 'The Duma is no place for discussion!', as the speaker of the lower house Boris Gryzlov so clearly formulated the relationship between the elite and democracy. The Duma obediently rubber-stamps the government's draft laws without asking any difficult questions about budget expenditure or interfering in government policy.

The military-administrative vertical is part of our DNA, but democratic values, power sharing and a law-based society are concepts we have to learn.

The value systems and social development of most Russians place them somewhere on a level with medieval feudal society. The country has many talented academics and writers, but the general mass of people are politically passive, ground down, socially impotent and unable to defend their rights or interests.

Citizens have to be given a 'legal weapon' – the right guaranteed by the law to defend the public interest in court. Getting people with a vested interest to resist corruption could be a great deal more effective than police measures or the Directorate of Public Prosecutions.

Дата добавления: 2015-11-04