THE USA JOURNALS
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE LAW AND CRIMINOLOGY (ISSN- 2693-0803)
VOLUME 06 ISSUE06
52
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
PUBLISHED DATE: - 30-06-2024
DOI: -
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume06Issue06-09
PAGE NO.: - 52-54
COOPERATION OF STATE AND PUBLIC
INSTITUTIONS IN THE FIGHT OF
CORRUPTION
Arabov Baxtiyor Isomiddinovich
First Vice-Rector of Oriental University for Youth Affairs and Spiritual Educational Work, Uzbekistan
INTRODUCTION
According to the results of a sociological survey
among the youth of Central Asia, there are three
main problems in Kazakhstan: corruption 47.3%,
unemployment 24.2%, and poverty 8.0%. For
Kyrgyzstan: corruption 37.5%, unemployment
35.3%, poverty 8.5%. According to the youth of
Tadjikistan: corruption is 42.0%, unemployment is
17.9%, and poverty is 12.0%. Answers of
respondents from Uzbekistan: unemployment
44.0%, corruption 17.8%, employment 5.9% . The
results of the sociological survey show that the
problem of corruption is high in the region and
requires systematic work to eliminate it.
If we look at the experience of countries that have
achieved effective results in the fight against
corruption and curbed corruption, we can see that
civil society institutions are one of the main
participants in the fight against corruption and the
government in these countries. In general, the
effectiveness of the fight against corruption cannot
be achieved without the participation of civil
society institutions.
The role of civil society institutions in the fight
against corruption is manifested, first of all, in
determining the risk of corruption. The fact is that
the threat of corruption is not considered a crime,
and the state has not established responsibility for
allowing it. However, the risk of corruption is
always perceived negatively by the society,
including civil society institutions, and the society,
in turn, reacts to it accordingly. The reason is that
the first corruption complications are first felt in
society.
Researchers also put forward their approaches in
this regard. In particular, according to A. Tursunov,
“Analysis shows that the general public plays an
important role in exposing corruption. In this
regard, it is possible to cite many examples of cases
of corruption that were not detected by state
agencies and were exposed by the general public.
At that time, there were bodies with special powers
to determine the facts of corruption. This is
because the public and the media cannot be
deceived and misled. No matter how hidden it is,
corrupt people try to hide such facts. Society and
mass media will also learn about the facts of
corruption” .
In addition, it should be noted that one of the
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Open Access
Abstract
THE USA JOURNALS
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE LAW AND CRIMINOLOGY (ISSN- 2693-0803)
VOLUME 06 ISSUE06
53
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
important means of limiting or preventing
corruption is transparency and accountability. The
reason is that corruption always happens secretly.
It takes root well in a space where transparency
does not exist. Transparency cannot be ensured by
the government itself without influencing the
society. The issue of responsibility is the object and
subject of such corruption, and a member of
society. Society's sense of this responsibility
prevents the individual from corruption.
Another aspect of the role of civil society
institutions in forming an intolerant attitude
towards any form of corruption is that corruption
is not accepted by society as a normal social norm.
If the society fights for this alone and the
government or civil servant turns a blind eye to
corruption or encourages it, then slowly the
members of the society accept it as a normal
situation or rather as a social norm. Now society is
starting to get used to it instead of fighting against
it. From this point of view, the firm attitude of the
public to any form of corruption is extremely
important in the fight against corruption.
In a word, civil society institutions should
represent a comprehensive mechanism of
formation, development, and implementation of
society’s opportunities and potential in the fight
against corruption.
In addition, the public's reaction to corruption
must be based on effective public pressure. As
noted by A. Tursunov, although public pressure is
not considered legal support, it makes it possible to
implement civil initiatives in the fight against
corruption, to effectively influence the actions of
state bodies and officials .
At the same time, the effective participation of the
society and institutions under its influence in the
fight against corruption is determined by several
aspects. In particular, according to A.Tursunov, the
following is necessary for the effective
participation of civil society institutions in the fight
against corruption:
first, the society itself must realize the need for
active participation of the public in the fight against
corruption;
secondly, the state should encourage the
participation of civil society institutions in the fight
against corruption;
thirdly, it is necessary to increase the role of the
mass media in the fight against corruption, to
constantly support their activities. In this regard,
independent special mass media, at least programs
covering issues of the fight against corruption, are
important;
fourthly, it is necessary to develop cooperation
between state and civil society institutions in the
fight against corruption” .
At the same time, society always realizes or strives
for the need to fight against corruption. In this
regard, the government's initiative and intolerance
to corruption are more important. Only after
society feels this in practice, it starts to show its
intolerance against corruption.
The authorities show their intolerance to
corruption with the following efforts. First of all,
the authorities need to coordinate the forces in the
fight against corruption, that is, the capabilities of
society and the authorities, and to monitor
cooperation. These are important components of a
comprehensive national anti-corruption strategy.
Coordination will have to go both ways. The first is
policy coordination in this regard, and the second
is coordination of activities for its implementation.
At the same time, monitoring and analyzing the
implementation of anti-corruption plans and
studying the level of corruption is also an
important mission.
At the same time, there are tendencies to form
specialized institutions that fight against
corruption as representatives of the authorities.
Researchers note the following as its main models:
multi-purpose anti-corruption agencies with
powers, law enforcement bodies, as well as
institutions performing preventive functions are
shown;
appear as anti-corruption law enforcement
bodies or anti-corruption departments in the law
enforcement structure;
corruption prevention, policy development,
and
coordination
institutions
appear
as
institutions that coordinate anti-corruption efforts
THE USA JOURNALS
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE LAW AND CRIMINOLOGY (ISSN- 2693-0803)
VOLUME 06 ISSUE06
54
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
.
The first model represents a complex approach to
problem-solving and is therefore significant.
The second model appears as a part of the existing
anti-corruption institution and mainly uses force as
part of the system. But in this case, one of the
important missions of the specialized institute is
repressive punishment rather than prevention.
In the third model, it is mainly an independent
institution and is considered more strategic in the
fight against corruption.
Institutions created according to the third model
have the most diverse forms and differ in their
organizational structure and degree of freedom. At
the same time, according to the third model, the
following
types of
institutions
can
be
distinguished: 1) research institutes, studying
corruption as a phenomenon, studying the risk of
corruption in various fields. Areas of public life and
improvement of legislation in this regard are also
their main directions; 2) inspection of the conflict-
of-interest control institutions and property
declaration of civil servants; 3) commissions for
coordination and monitoring of anti-corruption
strategies and action plans, etc. In general, the
above are the competent bodies of the state in the
fight against corruption, and they differ based on
their powers, duties, and the level of corruption in
the state . Importantly, in the above models, society
also appears as a helper in the fight against
corruption.
Accountability and transparency are another
aspect that encourages effective cooperation
between the state and society in the fight against
corruption. It is this cooperation that limits any
state institution from having absolute freedom. It
restrains them in a certain sense.
However, the problem is that it is important to
raise the above principles to the level of value in the
state. For this, strong pressure from society on the
authorities is required, and effective reforms are
required from the authorities. In addition, in the
matter of accountability, the government's
accountability to itself may be more “independent”.
That is, the government cannot be accountable to
itself, and it will not be effective. The government
needs to be accountable to the society.
Transparency is manifested more in the activities
of the authorities, but the influence, request, and
demand of the society play an important role in
ensuring it. Two important institutions of society
play a big role in this. They are mass media and
NGOs.
REFERENCE
1.
Социальные технологии: учебные пособие
для бакалавриата и магистратуры / под ред.
И.Б.Орловой. –
М.: Юрайт, 2019.
2.
Турсунов
А.Участие
институтов
гражданского общества в борьбе с
коррупцией// Том 1 № 1 (
2021).
3.
Горан
Клеменчич,
Янек
Стусек
Специализированные институты по борьбе
с
коррупцией:
обзор
моделей
https://www.oecd.org/corruption/acn/3997
2100.pdf
