Independent anti-corruption expertise in Russia: an unsuccessful experiment

Occupation: Assistant to the Head of the Nizhny Novgorod Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for Innovative Development of Scientific Activity; President of the Nizhny Novgorod Research Scientific and Applied Center “Legal Technology”
Affiliation: Nizhny Novgorod Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia
Address: Russian Federation, Nizhny Novgorod

Alexander R. Lavrentiev

Occupation: Head of the Department of state and legal disciplines of the Volga branch of the Russian State University of Justice; senior researcher of the Scientific and Educational Center for Expert Support of Public Administration
Affiliation: Dobrolyubov Nizhniy Novgorod State Linguistic University
Address: Russian Federation, Nizhny Novgorod

Nikolai Trusov

Occupation: Head of the Department of Constitutional and International Law of the Nizhny Novgorod Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia; associate Professor of the Department of state and legal disciplines of the Volga branch of the Russian State Univ
Affiliation: Nizhny Novgorod Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia
Address: Russian Federation, Nizhny Novgorod

Journal name

Gosudarstvo i pravo

Edition

Issue 1

Pages

110-119

Abstract

The mechanism for corruption counteraction has been formed in the Russian Federation in accordance with international standards. The authors of the article believe that for more than 10 years of monitoring the current practice of corruption counteraction, it is time to critically assess the effectiveness of both the entire mechanism and its individual measures. On the example of one of the measures to prevent (prevent) corruption – independent anti-corruption expertise – the authors, one of whom is an independent expert, put forward a hypothesis about its extremely low effectiveness (the number of experts is steadily decreasing; their activity, despite the made efforts, is low; the quality of expert opinions leaves much to be desired, etc.; the doctrinal interest in this topic is also decreasing) and they suggest to abandon it altogether. The capabilities of civil society institutions in corruption counteraction will not be limited, since the functions similar to independent anti-corruption expertise can be filled with the help of existing institutions of citizens’ appeals, regulatory impact assessment, law enforcement monitoring. There are a lot of critical studies on the topic of combating corruption, both in Russia and abroad, but the overwhelming number of experts suggests supplementing the “package” of anti-corruption measures, and the authors could not find any convincing proposals for rejecting any of the obviously ineffective measures as the independent anti-corruption expertise.

Keywords

corruption counteraction, anti-corruption expertise, independent anti-corruption expertise, independent expert, citizens’ appeals, unsuccessful experiment

Received

28.06.2021

Publication date

17.03.2022

Number of characters

30641

Cite

GOST	Baranov V., Lavrentiev A., Trusov N. Independent anti-corruption expertise in Russia: an unsuccessful experiment // Gosudarstvo i pravo – 2022. – Issue 1 C. 110-119 [Electronic resource]. URL: https://gospravo-journal.ru/S102694520018441-6-1 (circulation date: 04.05.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S102694520018441-6
MLA	Baranov, Vladimir M, Lavrentiev, Alexander R., Trusov, Nikolai "Independent anti-corruption expertise in Russia: an unsuccessful experiment." Gosudarstvo i pravo 1 (2022):110-119. DOI: 10.31857/S102694520018441-6
APA	Baranov V., Lavrentiev A., Trusov N. (2022). Independent anti-corruption expertise in Russia: an unsuccessful experiment. Gosudarstvo i pravo (1), pp.110-119 DOI: 10.31857/S102694520018441-6

100 rub.

When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 2, views: 505

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Eliseeva V.S., Lavrentiev A.R. Anti-corruption expertise of normative legal acts and draft normative legal acts: practice of law enforcement // State and law in a changing world: new vectors of judicial reform: materials of the III scientific and practical Conference with international participation, N. Novgorod, March 21, 2017. N. Novgorod, 2018. P. 167–183 (in Russ.).

2. Zykin D.O. About some problems of the institute of anti-corruption expertise // Actual aspects of the development of modern science: collection of scientific articles of the International scientific Conference / res. ed.: S.I. Ashmarina, A.V. Pavlova. Samara, 2019. P. 320–323 (in Russ.).

3. Lavrentiev A.R. Improving the effectiveness of the Institute of Independent anti-corruption expertise of normative legal acts and draft normative legal acts // Investigator. 2013. No. 1 (177). P. 35 - 40 (in Russ.).

4. Morozova A.I. Some reasons for the ineffectiveness of the work of the Institute of Independent Experts and the problems of applying the methodology of conducting anti-corruption expertise // Herald of the Tver State University. Series: Law. 2014. No. 4. P. 199 - 209 (in Russ.).

5. Popov V.V., Lavrentiev A.R. Questions of theory and practice of legal and anti-corruption expertise in the subject of the Russian Federation: review of speeches of Conference participants // History, Theory, Practice of Russian Law: collection of scientific papers / chief ed. S.N. Tokarev. Kursk, 2020. Vol. 13. P. 138 - 154 (in Russ.).

6. Borodina O. A. Prospective directions of prosecutor’s office Activity in enhancing the institution of independent anti-corruption expertise // Actual Problems of Russian Law. No. 16 (1). P. 136 - 146. DOI: 10.17803/1994-1471.2021.122.1.136-146. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348878645_Prospective_Directions_of_Prosecutor%27s_Offi_ce_Activity_in_Enhancing_the_Institution_of_Independent_Anti-Corruption_Expertise (accessed: 15.03.2021).

7. Cherepanova E. Anti-corruption expertise as an element of legal monitoring: comparative legal research // Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law. 2019. No. 5 (2). DOI: 10.12737/art.2019.2.15. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336573167_ANTI-CORRUPTION_EXPERTISE_AS_AN_ELEMENT_OF_LEGAL_MONITORING_COMPARATIVE_LEGAL_RESEARCH (accessed: 15.03.2021).

8. Naschyokina E. V. The significance of anti-corruption expertise in the process of forming the regional legal framework in the far eastern federal district. 2020. DOI: 10.38161/2618-9526-2020-1-2-12. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348598677_THE_SIGNIFICANCE_OF_ANTI-CORRUPTION_EXPERTISE_IN_THE_PROCESS_OF_FORMING_THE_REGIONAL_LEGAL_FRAMEWORK_IN_THE_FAR_EASTERN_FEDERAL_DISTRICT (accessed: 15.03.2021).

9. Reichborn-Kjennerud K., González-Díaz B., Steccolini I. Sais work against corruption in Scandinavian, South-European and African countries: An institutional analysis // The British Accounting Review. 2019. V. 51. Is. 5. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890838919300678 (accessed: 15.03.2021).

10. Tsirin A. Anti-corruption expertise in Russia and foreign countries: comparative legal research // Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law. 2018. No. 4 (4). DOI: 10.12737/art.2018.4.18. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329030363_ANTI-CORRUPTION_EXPERTISE_IN_RUSSIA_AND_FOREIGN_COUNTRIES_COMPARATIVE_LEGAL_RESEARCH (accessed: 15.03.2021).

11. Zheng B., Xiao J. Corruption and Investment: Theory and Evidence from China // Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. 2020. V. 175. P. 40 - 54. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167268120300858 (accessed: 15.03.2021).