Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Національне агентство з питань з питань запобігання корупції на варті попереднього рубежу протидії корупції: основні проблеми та способи їх вирішення.
Authors: Дудоров, О.О.
Мовчан, Р.О.
Keywords: Національне агентство з питань запобігання корупції, суд, адміністративні правопорушення, пов’язані з корупцією, протокол, постанова.
National Agency for Corruption Prevention, court, administrative offenses related to corruption, protocol, decision.
Issue Date: 2018
Publisher: РВВ ЛДУВС ім. Е.О. Дідоренка
Citation: Дудоров О.О., Мовчан Р.О. Національне агентство з питань з питань запобігання корупції на варті попереднього рубежу протидії корупції: основні проблеми та способи їх вирішення. Вісник Луганського державного університету внутрішніх справ імені Е.О. Дідоренка. 2018. № 3. С. 60–73.
Abstract: Здійснено моніторинг сучасного стану виконання Національним агентством з питань запобігання корупції функції протидії адміністративним правопорушенням, які пов’язані з корупцією (статті 172-4–172-9 КУпАП). Встановлено основні проблеми у вказаній сфері, сформульовано пропозиції щодо шляхів їх вирішення.
The monitoring of the current state of implementation by the National Agency for the Corruption Prevention of the functions of countering administrative offenses related to corruption (Article 172-4-172-9 Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses, CUAO) has been conducted. The basic issues in this area are established, suggestions on means for their solution are formulated. In particular, it has been clarified that a number of factors influence the unsatisfactory performance by the NACP of its functions in providing counteraction to said offenses, the most significant of which are the following: 1) the failure by the relevant officials to comply with the requirements established by the CUAO and the NACP itself, in particular regarding the recording of administrative offenses related to corruption, and ensuring the rights of persons for whom the issue of bringing them to administrative liability is resolved; 2) the lack of uniform and established practice of court proceedings in administrative corruption offenses (mostly this practice is formed by the local level courts) and the lack of effective mechanisms that would ensure the unification of the interpretation and application of appropriate administrative law prohibitions; 3) imperfection and inconsistency with current realities of enforcement of the CUAO norms, including those that regulate the procedure of bringing to administrative liability those persons, who have committed offenses related to corruption. Thus, it has been established that the widespread nature of the judicial practice of closing cases referred to CUAO in connection with the insignificance of the relevant acts does not support successful introduction of the newest preventive anti-corruption mechanisms. In order to put an end to such dubious practice, and supporting similar ideas of different researchers, Art. 22 of CUAO is proposed to be worded as follows: «If an administrative offense is insignificant, with the exception of administrative offenses related to corruption, the authority (official) authorized to decide the case may release the offender from administrative liability and limit himself to oral notice». In determining the reasons for why a large percentage of cases on administrative offenses related to corruption is closed, it is established that: a) the statute of limitations for imposing administrative penalties stipulated in Art. 38 CUAO for such offenses are too short; b) the definition of the detection of such an offense, important for the application of Art. 38 of CUAO is not legally defined and is interpreted differently by theorists and practitioners; c) «binding» of the limitation periods for the bringing of administrative liability for corruption offenses does not take into account the fact that the said offenses are not of continuing nature (except as provided for in Article 172-4 of the CUAO); d) the factor facilitating the expiration of the time limits for imposing administrative penalties is the abuse by the violators of anti-corruption legislation of rights. In view of the above, it is proposed to refuse from the «binding» of time limits for imposing administrative penalties for committing an administrative corruption offense c with the detection of the relevant offense, leaving in Part 3 of Art. 38 of CUAO reference to only a two-year period, which starts running from the day of the offense commission.
Appears in Collections:Статті

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
5. Дудоров Мовчан НАЗК.pdf423.27 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.