Komron Tursunmurodov

Image source: www.news18.com

Introduction

Corruption is one of the primary issues of every country that destroys their economy, exacerbates social injustice, erodes people’s trust in authorities, and, most importantly, results in a perception of lawlessness. In addition to improving anti-corruption legislation, countries employ various strategies to fight and eradicate corruption. This blog post will discuss the urgent need to adopt an anticorruption strategy in Uzbekistan and highlight the positive and negative outcomes of the proposed Anti-Corruption Strategy-2030 (AC Strategy). The blog post also clarifies the implementation issues of the AC Strategy and recommends several suggestions to improve it.

The necessity of National anti-corruption strategy in Uzbekistan

The government of Uzbekistan should promptly adopt the AC Strategy for the following three main reasons.

First, corruption has become a recurring issue, nurturing a corrupt environment in the republic. Interestingly, officials who are supposed to fight corruption are engaging in corrupt activities themselves. For instance, the Kogon district prosecutor was caught red-handed while receiving 90,000 USD in bribes in 2024. Besides, there were several incidents when judges (in Kashkadarya and Namangan) solicited or accepted bribes. These cases show the weak anti-corruption situation in the country.

Second, the high corruption hinders Uzbekistan’s efforts to raise its economy by attracting foreign investment. In 2023, according to Transparency International, Uzbekistan scored 33 and ranked 121 out of 180 countries, making Uzbekistan one of the most corrupt countries in the world. Due to the perception of lawlessness, foreign entrepreneurs and investors do not wish to invest in the Uzbek economy. Therefore, the pervasive corruption in Uzbekistan significantly deters foreign investment, severely hampering the country’s economic growth.

Third, citizens’ awareness of the consequences of corruption still needs to be raised: in several cases, they tend to initiate corruption. For example, the research conducted by the Anti-corruption Agency (ACA) revealed that students initiate corrupt behavior in 76.7% of cases. Thus, the lack of understanding about the negative impacts of corruption contributes to its persistence, making it hard to eradicate.

Positive outcomes of the AC strategy

The AC strategy provides multiple advantages in combating corruption in Uzbekistan.

1. The AC strategy enhances the responsibility of public officials. Within the new reforms, public officials’ accountability to society is increasing. The AC strategy pursues establishing the administrative liability of public officials for failing to take anti-corruption measures required by the legislation. Notably, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan have already introduced this type of liability.

2. The AC strategy improves recruitment procedures in public service. The AC strategy aims to introduce the principle of meritocracy, which provides an open competition recruitment of public servants and their promotion based only on professional qualities. Researcher Lirigzon Karaqica revealed a correlation between meritocracy and corruption, specifically, that a high meritocracy is associated with low corruption. Hence, the principle of meritocracy significantly reduces corruption since it establishes a transparent recruitment procedure.

3. In public procurement, privileges and preferences will be defined by law. The AC strategy sets that only statutory law can establish privileges and preferences in public procurement, other legal acts such as Presidential decrees or resolutions of the Cabinet of Ministers cannot grant such benefits. This rule ensures that certain groups will not unfairly receive privileges and preferences. Particularly, the President will not be able to provide privileges and preferences to domestic manufacturers when they participate in the public procurement of goods.

4. The AC strategy empowers the Anti-Corruption Agency with “initial investigation” competence in corruption cases. The Prosecutor’s Office is currently responsible for preliminary investigations of corruption cases. By authorizing the ACA to investigate corruption cases, the AC strategy provides this agency with the same capabilities as the prosecutors, although the power to initiate the criminal case remains with the latter. This shift in power marks a positive development for the ACA, which lacks the authority to conduct preliminary investigations.

5. The AC strategy includes measures to shield judges from external influences.  Judges concerned about the risk to their independence can seek support from a supreme judicial authority. Researcher Siri Gloppen argues that one way of combatting judicial corruption is to ensure the independence of the judiciary from both political and executive pressure. Thus, safeguarding judicial independence is essential for combating corruption.

Possible shortcomings of the AC strategy

The analysis of the AC strategy revealed several shortcomings.

1. The AC strategy lacks clear measures to empower the national anti-corruption body with full investigative competencies. The Prosecutor’s Office, the State Security Service, and the Ministry of Internal Affairs can investigate inter alia corruption cases, which leads to a dilution of efforts and a lack of specialization in handling these cases. The AC strategy entitles the ACA solely with the initial investigation; it will simply detect corrupt activity and inform the above law enforcement bodies. The initial detection by the ACA does not ensure specialized handling of these cases by the subsequent law enforcement bodies. Therefore, the ACA should be entitled to all necessary investigative powers.

2. The AC strategy does not establish specific timeframes for achieving its goals. While the strategy spans six years, some objectives could be completed within a year, while others may require a longer timeframe. Some countries, like Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and South Africa, have set clear timeframes for their anti-corruption strategies. These timeframes help to monitor progress and maintain accountability. Thus, implementing specific timeframes within the AC strategy benefits the achievement of its goals.

3. The strategy is heavily focused on prevention. Chapter IV of the strategy highlights the prevention of corruption; however, it puts less emphasis on combatting corruption itself. The AC strategy should focus on a balanced preventive and repressive approach to corruption. Undoubtedly, prosecution of corruption is as equally important as its prevention. Notably, the Anti-corruption strategies of Lebanon and Kazakhstan equally set forth both measures. For example, the criminalization of trading in influence, which is a form of corruption, may yield favorable results. Therefore, the AC strategy should incorporate repressive measures as well.

4. Some measures of the AC strategy in public administration are unrealistic. Though the AC strategy seeks the independence of internal control divisions against corruption in administrative agencies, the strategy does not provide any specific mechanisms to achieve this goal. According to the current Model regulation, internal control divisions are directly subordinate to the first head of the agency. Although this Model regulation mentions supervisory boards as an alternative authority for internal control divisions, it only prescribes the possibility of their creation without any obligation to establish them. Due to this hierarchy and loopholes, internal control divisions cannot fulfill their obligations. Therefore, this AC strategy’s measure is vague and unachievable.

5. Some measures of the AC strategy in public service already exist. The AC strategy establishes the regulation of kinship relations in public service. However, the Labor Code and the Law on Public Civil Service already prohibit holding a public service position in the same state body with relatives.

Recommendations

The following recommendations will enhance the AC strategy and address the deficiencies identified in the analyses.

First, the government should elevate the status of the ACA by granting specific powers to investigate only corruption-related crimes. By entrusting the ACA with comprehensive investigative authority solely focused on corruption offenses, it will establish a dedicated body in Uzbekistan tasked with combating corruption effectively. Notably, the Anti-corruption Agency of Kazakhstan, along with forming and implementing the anti-corruption policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan, detects, restrains, reveals, and investigates corruption offenses.

Second, the AC strategy should indicate timeframes for specific goals. Drawing from South Africa’s experience, the six-year period of the AC strategy should be divided into four phases: immediate term, short term, medium term, and long term.

Third, the strategy must strike a balance between preventive and punitive measures to effectively combat corruption. It is imperative that Chapter IV of the Strategy explicitly includes strategies for not only preventing but also eliminating corruption. This can be achieved by incorporating measures such as criminalizing all forms of corruption, including trading in influence, providing illegal financial gains by individuals or entities, and receiving illegal material benefits by those in positions of authority, etc.

Fourth, the internal control divisions within administrative agencies should operate independently from the agency head. Each administrative agency should establish a Supervisory Board to oversee the activities of internal control divisions and hold them accountable. Additionally, the hierarchical subordination of these internal control divisions to the agency head should be eliminated to ensure unbiased oversight of anti-corruption efforts.

Finally, rather than focusing on establishing regulatory frameworks for kinship relations in public service, the AC strategy should prioritize enhancing mechanisms for identifying such relationships and implementing consequences for those who violate the law. This approach will help to effectively address issues of nepotism and favoritism within the public sector.

Conclusion

This blog post highlights Uzbekistan’s current need to adopt an Anti-corruption strategy, points out the main advantages of the proposed Anti-Corruption Strategy-2030 and some of its shortcomings, and provides feasible recommendations. The findings illustrate that the AC strategy should equally focus on preventive and repressive approaches to corruption, establish timeframes for the whole six-year period by dividing it into four phases, and form a new independent Anti-corruption body. These suggestions will assist the government of Uzbekistan to more effectively combat corruption.

Cite as:  Komron Tursunmurodov, “A Deep Dive into a National Anti-Corruption Strategy of Uzbekistan”, Uzbekistan Law Blog, 16.07.2024.