Corruption in Russia
Introduction
Corruption refers to commission of fraud and crime using power and authority bestowed upon an individual for the sake of selfish gains and self-gratification. This is perpetuated through the misappropriation of funds and other resources meant for equitable distribution among the citizenry. It is interesting that corruption was legally accepted in the Soviet Union before the 18th century. During this time, the government officials accepted bribery from the public without recourse. Indeed, the officials received irregular remunerations, which contributed to this state of undue public service. This served to supplement their source of income.
These malpractices took place during the reign of Peter the Great. They initiated the events that led to the presentation that shaped the history of the country. However, when Catherine II took over the whims of power, she ensured regular salaries to the civil servants in her government. The government policy framework of that time was flawed hence corruption prevailed. In 1922, this practice was realized to be counterproductive to Russia hence a law was created to prohibit the participation in this social evil. The new law stipulated that the crime commission should be subject to corporal punishment.
The Level of Corruption in Russia
Corruption has taken the center-stage in Russia. According to Wegren (12), the Russian corruption level is high compared to the African states. Bribery is rampant in the country, and this has culminated in high levels of corruption. It has taken root in the housing, health, and educational sectors, which are essential in provision of necessary services to the citizens. Russia is also affected by corruption in the law enforcement agencies, construction, legal fraternity, and the land sector. In fact, this malpractice stagnated the infrastructural growth and development in the country. This owed to the fact that construction costs were inflated to accommodate embezzlement of public funds. The construction cost for roads and social amenities were always higher compared to the same cost in other countries. The government officials who were in charge of awarding tenders quoted high costs in order to get high budgetary allocations. The officials pocketed the extra funds. This indicated the intention to develop the increased tension and advancement in the misappropriation of the fairly allocated developmental share in the government.
The government arm responsible for the issuing of legal documents is also prone to corruption. This lowers the quality of services offered by these government bodies. Indeed, even the procurement agency is prone to corruption in the offering and bidding for various tenders of the government. Any form of corruption impacts the state negatively. For instance, lack of transparency led to decline of 15% of the gross national product of Russia as per the end of 2011. This owed to the failure of remission of taxation to relevant authorities and other forms of tax evasion and avoidance. Corruption is a bottomless pit given that officials practice it in the form of bribery in order to dispense their mandate as civil servants. This makes it difficult for the people to enjoy social benefits and rights as citizens of Russia. International bodies like the World Bank have rated corruption highly in terms of corruption levels in the country.
This practice has culminated in insecurity among citizens because they have to pay criminal vigilante groups to protect them. This reveals the extent to which this malpractice has lowered the living standards of the Russian people. The citizens are at a loss because they have to pay the price of the malpractice through payment of high charges of water, power, and gas. They constitute basic necessities in life hence the cost must be incurred. This fuels poverty among the nationals given that the consumption rate is higher than saving and investment rates. According to Moynahan and Evtušenko (9), the country has experienced increase of 400% in corruption levels over a period of 20 years.
Vladimir Putin’s administration provided many loopholes for perpetuation and perpetration of corruption. For instance, the Ozero co-operative entity, which was created during this administration, is known to be party to misappropriation of millions of government funds. Unlike in the past, Putin’s administration could not tolerate demonstrations clamoring for accountability of public resources. This aggravated the situation hence increase in levels of corruption in Russia. Putin’s era was characterized by anarchy. This is because businesses were tied to the government and Putin’s relatives were given priority in lucrative opportunities like government tenders and other positions within the government. Furthermore, friends of this leader benefited directly from the exchequer and other properties of the state.
Reasons for Corruption in Russia
The development of the corrupt officials and initiated deals developed from events that could be noted earlier in the century. Measures to curb corruption have been put in place from the times of Novgorod, Peter the Great, and Catherine II. In fact, Novgorod instituted a policy, which prohibited his relatives and acquaintances from possessing any government property. In addition, this leader put in place checks and balances in various government institutions. This, notwithstanding high levels of this malpractice, has been experienced in Russia over the years. This owes to favourism among the leaders and the civil servants. For instance, Wegren (20) posits that Catherine II spent an estimate of 90 million on her lovers and favorite individuals yet the government budget at the time was only 16 million. This is manifest of the magnitude of corruption that leaders practice without recourse. Personal contacts are used by favorites of the civil servants in order to enjoy the public resources and other privileges hence corruption was not only monetary.
There are many causes of perpetuation of crimes in this nation. For example, the lack of autonomy of the judiciary leads to legal compromise, which results in a poor legal framework and failure of implementation of the laws of the land. This provides the errand members to escape scot-free, which renders the creation of the constitution futile. In addition, the lack of independency leads to bribery hence allowing corrupt deals to be executed. This compromises on the judiciary deprives the nationals of fair and just treatment when legal cases are brought before this judiciary. Furthermore, this compromise leads to lack of confidence in the judiciary and businessmen will not invest in the country due to this uncertainty.
The lack of independency of the media is another cause of corruption given that malpractices cannot be broadcasted to masses of people. In fact, almost all television stations, radio stations, newspapers, and magazines are controlled by the state. NTV is the only station that was independent but it was taken over by a government agency called Gazprom in 2001(Moynahan and Evtušenko 67). Independency of the mass media gives the public a chance to defend the public resources. Public can hold demonstrations in protest of misuse of office-by-office holders. Therefore, freedom of the media can accomplish much in ensuring that there is transparency and accountability in the governance of Russia.
Lack of democracy also results in a dictatorial leadership, which is prone to corruption. Political completion gives the citizens an opportunity to choose leaders who are worth of leadership. Rarely has democracy resulted in massive cases of corruption. This owes to the fact that the public knows the leaders of good will and leaders of ill will with regard to leadership. In addition, multiparty results in automatic checks and balances by the camps defeated in political contests. Consequently, this results in accountability and transparency in the budgeting, using government funds and other resources, for example, natural.
The lack of civil human right organizations leads to non-implementation of the constitution to the letter, especially the penal code. They help in compelling all the arms of government to protect the welfare of the citizenry. This results in infringement of the rights of the citizens by the civil servants in the absence of the non- governmental organizations responsible for protecting the welfare of the nationals. These groups also help in enlightening of the public on their rights and benefits. In addition, they teach the communities on techniques of improving their living standards like self-reliance and initiation of community development projects.
According to Shelley and Handelman (28), the influence of relatives in Russian politics was the highest in the nation’s security sector, the executive and the organized crime respectively. The influence of relatives makes nepotism inevitable in the civil servant’s dispensation of duties. For instance, the recruitment in the security sector will favor relatives of the security officers in order for the officers’ corruption deals to be a success. This poses danger to the families not represented in this capacity. The executive has many privileges hence relative influence is inevitable. This tendency enhances abuse of office and moral decadence. However, organized crime is influenced by the relatives of those citizens who are vulnerable to the injustice of the state. This becomes the last resort for the nationals who feel abandoned by the state with regard to access to resources. Although, this creates a balance in resource distribution, it is risky given that confrontation between the corrupt security forces and gangs often leads to death. This is a manifestation of failure of a government in equitable distribution of national resources.
The legislature of Russia was flawed in the sense that the corruption term is not clearly defined in the constitution hence the judiciary has the discretion of defining the term in whichever way it deems fit. Therefore, the judiciary could define the term in any manner in order to serve the interests at hand. This provided a leeway to injustices impartiality in the judiciary. The civil servants are subjected to lenient treatment when they are faced with charges in court. On the other hand, critics of the malpractices in governance are severely punished. This fuels corruption because the public fears to be mistreated by the security officers.
The government of Russia also controls the private sector. This negatively affects the capital, money, and goods market. The free market mechanism is eroded hence there is imbalance between the forces of demand and the forces of supply in the three market scenarios. This culminates in monopolistic markets whereby only the affluent dominate it as the middle class and low income businessmen become irrelevant to business.
The Effects of Corruption
Corruption led to exploitation of the poor and enrichment of the rich in the Russian economy. This owes to the fact that the civil servants, their relatives, and acquaintances took part in tax avoidance and tax evasion through failure of submission of salary tax assessment forms. Inclusion of government officials’ kickbacks during the preparation of the government budget resulted in discrimination in the use of public resources and abuse of power. This resulted in strikes, and decline in the overall economic growth and development of the nation. Moreover, these acts resulted in failure to implement the financial and economic policies. These policies were to ensure that government funds were economically utilized. Consequently, there was increase in the levels of poverty and strife among the citizenry.
Corruption led to decline in foreign investments in Russia hence low reserves of foreign currency, especially the dollar currency (Cheloukhine and Haberfeld 78). This compromised the economic growth and development of goals priorly set by the same government technocrats. Corruption in the form of bribery fueled inflation, which in turn led to economic decline of the Russian economy. This owes to the fact that bribery increases the cost of production of goods and services hence pushing the burden to the final consumer of commodities. This exhausts the disposable income of the consumers resulting in inflationary pressures in the Russian economy.
This malpractice implies insecurity for any potential private investor. This drives away potential investors leaving untapped natural resources in the Russian economy. For instance, the direct foreign investments were forgone. This made the country lose in terms of technical expertise, knowledge, and expertise in various modern foreign technologies in the information and communication, infrastructure, and education sectors. The investors sought favorable and more secure nations for their investments. The gross national product of Russia declined to lower levels compared to other nations with zero tolerance of corruption.
The Fight against Corruption and its Impact
Moynahan and Evtušenko (34) conjecture that the fight against corruption had been long overdue until there was formation of an anti-corruption team, which started campaigns against the malpractice in 1992. This was a directive from the then president of Russia, Borris Yetsin. In fact, this move banned all civil servants from carrying out any form of business in the public. Furthermore, he demanded that all the civil servants declare their wealth and its origin. All who ignored the directive were dismissed from service and legally punished accordingly. The government also introduced the National anti-corruption committee to curb this activity in Russia. In addition, the National Anti-corruption plan has been formed to assess the wealth of civil servants and their family members. These corrective measures have proved effective because many errand people have been convicted and prosecuted accordingly.
There must be regulatory measures and clerical officers in the Russian government in order to curtail any form of corruption. This calls for the society as a whole to ensure they have representation in the running of the government. This takes the form of governors from various counties in Russia. These representatives will manage to notify the public of any corrupt deal concealed from the media and the public. Then, bribery Act should be implemented as it is stipulated in the Russian constitution. This act is punishable by death and its implementation will curtail the malpractice.
Recruitment of civil servants should be done in a transparent manner and on merit rather than on nepotism and tribal lines. The government should adjust the salaries of the civil servants favorably in order to motivate them to uphold transparency and accountability in their offices. The government needs to include all stakeholders in the creation and implementation of the reforms in various sectors. The government should also seek to borrow good governance policies from the corruption free nations like Switzerland. There should be adoption and embracing of the modern and sophisticated technologies in production and agriculture in order to be at bar with the world. The inclusiveness in reforms should include the guidance and educating of the public on the benefits of implementation of reforms to them.
Conclusion
The public and the politicians should support the anti-corruption campaigns. This commitment will result in transparency in governance. Economic, legal, and political reforms should be fully implemented in order to win the confidence of the international community and citizens. There should be a free market mechanism in place in order to have the determination of market equilibrium by the forces of demand and supply, not by the Russian government. There should be co-ordination in the whole process of reform creation and implementation. The justice should prevail in determination of cases in the judiciary arm of government.
Works Cited
Cheloukhine, Serguei, and Haberfeld. Russian Organized Corruption Networks and Their
International Trajectories. New York: Springer, 2011. Print.
Moynahan, Brian, and Evgenij A. Evtušenko. The Russian Century: A Photojournalistic History
of Russia in the Twentieth Century. London: Seven Dials,2009. Print.
Shelley, Louise I, and Handelman, Stephen. Crime and Corruption in Russia. Washington, DC:
The Commission, 2008. Print.
Wegren, Stephen K. Return to Putin’s Russia: Past Imperfect, Future Uncertain., 2012.
Print.
