Ukraine continues its slide in corruption ratings
Transparency International Ukraine writes that the results of the 2012 Corruption Perception Index are anything but cheering for Ukraine. It has dropped one point from its already shocking position a year ago
Ukraine is in 144th place out of 176 countries, with a score of 26 out of 100. Any score under 30 is regarded by the international corruption watchdog as shameful for a country. Last year’s result was 27 (2.3 under the old system of rating), so the country is moving backwards on the corruption front.
The results of the parliamentary elections and the overall erosion of democratic processes undoubtedly influenced how Ukraine was perceived in the world. However the most important factors for the increase in corruption are seen as the following.
The lack of activity of the National Anti-Corruption Committee under the President
The institution which should have the greatest power in countering corruption has not met for more than a year. Over 2012 the President only produced documents about changes in the makeup of the committee and updated approaches for its work.
There need to be real measures, not a paper imitation of fighting corruption.
The State Programme on Countering Corruption is not worth the paper it’s printed on
The money supposed to be allocated for 2011-2012 was not
Changes to legislation on public procurement put tens of billions of public spending (around a third)out of the tender process. The public has effectively been deprived of the right to information about purchases made with their money.
Transparency International expresses concern that most steps on fighting corruption remain in name alone. It suggests five priority steps:
The National Anti-Corruption Committee under the President must begin fulfilling its role;
The State Programme on Countering Corruption must be financed and implemented. The programme itself should be reviewed with the participation of independent experts and organizations;
Free access to information about public procurement must be reinstated;
Information in the Unified State Register of Persons Prosecuted for Corruption should be made public, with the relevant provisions of the Law on Personal Data Protection being revised to this end;
The norms on mandatory declaration by officials of spending need to be implemented without impediment. There should be general access to these declarations.