Anti-corruption restrictions on receiving gifts from officials of state bodies in conditions of conflict of interest: EU experience

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Anti-corruption restrictions on receiving gifts from officials of state bodies in conditions of conflict of interest: EU experience

Fedchyshyn Serhii Anatoliiovych Doctor of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor, Associate Professor at the Department, Harashchuk Volodymyr Mykolayovych Doctor of Legal Sciences, Professor, Professor at the Administrative Law Department, Yaroslav the Wise National Law University

Abstract

As the experience of European countries shows, the first step towards committing corrupt acts is the ability of a government official to receive gifts. Anti-corruption restrictions on receiving gifts for government officials in foreign countries to avoid conflicts of interest include both administrative and criminal measures. Attention is drawn to the fact that the UN Convention against Corruption (2003) enshrines provisions on restrictions on the receipt of gifts related to the use of official powers or official position both during their performance and after the termination of activities related to the performance of state functions. Such restrictions are stated to include the filing of government declarations of non-official activities, occupations, investments, assets, and significant gifts or income that may create a conflict of interest in the performance of their functions as government officials.

And also include restrictions on the professional activities of former public officials in the private sector after their resignation or retirement, if such activities or work are directly related to the functions that the public officials performed during their tenure or for which they were responsible observation. It was found that in some EU countries, at the legislative level, mandatory declaration of gifts has been introduced by persons holding political positions, and in some countries - by all public employees in order to avoid conflicts of interest. An analysis of court decisions in Ukraine on the receipt of gifts by healthcare officials subject to the Law of Ukraine “On the Prevention of Corruption” was carried out. It is concluded that, according to the legislation of Ukraine, the above-mentioned persons may not have a conflict of interest at any time of receiving a gift, but only if this occurs before or during the performance of their duties in the interests of the donor. For categories of government officials, national legislation should provide clearer parameters for receiving gifts related to hospitality, where each case should be assessed according to special criteria.

Keywords: administrative and legal support, conflict of interest, restriction of gifts, prevention of conflicts of interest, settlement of conflicts of interest, prevention and settlement of conflicts of interest, civil servants, foreign experience, healthcare.

Анотація

Антикорупційні обмеження щодо отримання подарунків у посадових осіб державних органів в умовах конфлікту інтересів: досвід ЄС

Федчишин Сергій Анатолійович доктор юридичних наук, доцент, доцент кафедри; Гаращук Володимир Миколайович доктор юридичних наук, професор, професор кафедри адміністративного права, Національний юридичний університет імені Ярослава Мудрого

Як свідчить досвід європейських країн, першим кроком на шляху до вчинення корупційних дій є можливість посадової особи державного органу отримувати подарунки. Антикорупційні обмеження щодо отримання подарунків для посадових осіб державних органів у зарубіжних країнах з метою уникнення конфлікту інтересів включають як адміністративно-правові, так і кримінально-правові заходи. Акцентовано увагу, що у Конвенції ООН проти корупції (2003) закріплено положення щодо обмежень отримання подарунків, пов'язаних з використанням службових повноважень чи службового становища як під час їх виконання, так і після припинення діяльності, пов'язаної з виконанням функцій держави. Указано, що такі обмеження включають подання державних декларацій про позаслужбову діяльність, про заняття, інвестиції, активи та про суттєві дарунки або прибутки, у зв'язку з якими може виникнути конфлікт інтересів під час виконання ними функцій як державних посадових осіб.

А також включають обмеження стосовно професійної діяльності колишніх державних посадових осіб у приватному секторі після їхнього виходу у відставку або на пенсію, якщо така діяльність або робота безпосередньо пов'язана з функціями, які державні посадові особи виконували в період їхнього перебування на посаді або за виконанням яких вони здійснювали нагляд. З'ясовано, що в окремих країнах ЄС на законодавчому рівні запроваджено обов'язкове декларування подарунків особами, що обіймають політичні посади, а в деяких країнах - всіма публічними службовцями з метою уникнення конфлікту інтересів. Здійснено аналіз судових рішень в Україні щодо одержання подарунків посадовими особами сфери охорони здоров'я, які підпадають під дію Закону України «Про запобігання корупції». Зроблено висновок, що конфлікт інтересів згідно законодавства України у вищенаведених осіб може виникати не в будь-який момент одержання подарунку, а лише якщо це відбулося до або під час виконання своїх обов'язків в інтересах дарувальника. Для категорій посадових осіб державних органів в національному законодавстві варто передбачити більш чіткі параметри отримання подарунків повязаних із «гостинністю», де кожний випадок повинен оцінюватись за спеціальними критеріями.

Ключові слова: адміністративно-правове забезпечення, конфлікт інтересів, обмеження щодо отримання подарунків, запобігання конфлікту інтересів, врегулювання конфлікту інтересів, посадові особи державних органів, досвід Європейського Союзу, охорона здоров'я.

gift public official hospitality

Problem formulation

Ensuring proper organizational and legal settlement of conflicts of interest is a strategic priority of anti-corruption activities of public authorities and civil society institutions. The existential significance of the permanent updating of anti-corruption legislation and the development of anticorruption institutional infrastructure is formally defined as an unconditional imperative in Ukraine and the European Union member states [1, p. 261]. As the experience of European countries shows, the first step on the way to committing corrupt acts is the opportunity for a public official to receive gifts [2]. According to the provisions of the Association Agreement between Ukraine, on the one hand, and the European Union, the European Atomic Energy Community and their member states, on the other hand (2014), it was declared that the Parties cooperate in the fight against corruption both in state bodies (Art. 22) [3] and in the private sphere, in particular, a number of preventive measures are provided for countering the illegal receipt of gifts.

In addition, among the main areas of implementation of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy in Ukraine, the activation of international cooperation in the field of prevention and counteraction of corruption is envisaged, namely: (a) bringing Ukraine's anti-corruption policy into line with international standards in the field of prevention and counteraction of corruption; (b) implementation of preparation and signing of interstate (interagency) bilateral and multilateral agreements on cooperation in the field of prevention and counteraction of corruption; (c) deepening cooperation with partner special services and law enforcement agencies in the field of counteraction of corruption; (d) implementation in Ukraine of the best practices of foreign countries in the field of prevention and counteraction of corruption, primarily regarding the introduction of the institute for the protection of honest informants; (e) formation of the image of Ukraine as a state that actively opposes manifestations of corruption, and obtaining international support for this activity [4].

The State Anti-Corruption Program for 2023-2025 emphasizes the fact that the legal regulation of prohibitions and restrictions on receiving gifts is imperfect in Ukraine, and not in all cases the prohibitions are backed by measures of legal responsibility [5]. For Ukraine, the issue of determining the illegality of gifts is extremely relevant, because in many cases, people give gifts to public officials in order to resolve issues in one's own interests [2]. The above indicates the relevance and need to clarify the content and features of foreign experience of administrative legal regulation of restrictions on receiving gifts, accepted in conditions of conflict of interests and establishing the possibilities of its use in the legislation of Ukraine.

Analysis of recent research and publications

Separate works are devoted to the study of administrative and legal support for the prevention and settlement of conflicts of interest in the activities of the judicial authorities [1], the prevention and settlement of conflicts of interests as a way of countering corruption [6], conflicts of interests in the field of public service [7, p. 407-427], prevention and settlement of conflict of interests in the field of health care [8, p. 387-398], anti-corruption bans and restrictions on the activities of police officers in Ukraine [9], legal settlement of conflicts of interests in the system of anti-corruption law [10], regarding the limitation of gifts to public officials [11, p. 222], [12], etc. indicate that research on the legal support for restrictions on receiving gifts that are accepted in conditions of conflict of interests is not sufficient and point to the need for further analysis of foreign experience on these issues.

Presenting key material

When studying anti-corruption restrictions on the procedure for receiving gifts by public officials in foreign countries related to conflicts of interest, it is important to consider them both in the system of administrative and criminal legal measures. However, we are interested in the experience of regulating such restrictions precisely from the point of view of administrative law. Thus, in order to limit such a form of concealment of corruption manifestations as receiving gifts, clause 5 of Article 8 of the UN Convention against Corruption (ratified by Ukraine) emphasizes that each participating State strives, in appropriate cases and in accordance with the fundamental principles of its domestic law, to introduce measures and schemes that oblige public officials to submit declarations to the relevant bodies, including about significant gifts, in connection with which a conflict of interests may arise [13]. As international experience shows, it is quite difficult to distinguish between a "gift" and a "bribe" (unlawful benefit) in practice, so the issue of receiving and giving gifts by public officials, in order to prevent the emergence of corruption in their activities, must be regulated at the legislative level [1].

In particular, certain provisions of the UN Convention against Corruption contribute to establishing restrictions on gifts related to the use of official powers or official position both during their performance and after the termination of activities related to the performance of state functions: 1) on the submission of state declarations about outside activities, employment, investments, assets and substantial gifts or benefits from which a conflict of interest may result with respect to their functions as public officials (Part 5 of Article 8); 2) on restrictions to prevent conflicts of interest and on the professional activities of former public officials or on the employment of public officials by the private sector after their resignation or retirement, where such activities or employment relate directly to the functions held or supervised by those public officials during their tenure (clause «e» of Part 2 of Article 12); (3) regarding the criminalization of acts of public officials in case of non-compliance with the requirements of anti-corruption restrictions related to the receipt of gifts during the performance of official duties [13].

Other international documents also indicate the need to limit gifts for public officials, namely: the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials (1979), the International Code of Conduct for Public Officials (1996), the UN Declaration On Combating Corruption and Bribery in International Commercial Transactions (1996), the Resolutions of the UN General Assembly Action against Corruption (1997), the Convention on Combating Bribery of Officials of Foreign States in the Case of International Business Transactions (1997), the OECD Recommendations on Further Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions (2009), the Resolution of the Council of Europe Twenty Guiding Principles for the Fight Against Corruption (1997), the Statute of the Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO) (1998), the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (1999), the Civil Law Convention on Corruption (1999), the Model code of conduct for public officials (2000), recommended by the Council of Europe, the Additional protocol to the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (2003), etc.

Thus, the International Code of Conduct for Public Officials contains a number of provisions, failure to comply with which indicates a violation of anticorruption restrictions on the use of official powers during and after their termination, as well as regarding the receipt of gifts, services, and property. State officials must strictly: 1) observe impartiality and not abuse the given powers and authority in the performance of their functions (clause 3); 2) avoid personal financial and commercial benefit or personal and financial benefit for their families (clause 4), etc. [14]. Article 7 of the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials introduces restrictions on abuse of office, requires not to receive gifts, benefits, or other incentives while performing one's duties [15].

Among the main instruments for the prevention of conflicts of interest, according to the study of policies and practices for the prevention of conflicts of interests in the EU countries, conducted by the OECD (hereinafter - the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), certain restrictions include the obligation to declare gifts, declare personal interest in decisions that are made, as well as the possibility of applying the right to recuse or standard procedures for the release of public officials from the performance of official duties, if participation in the discussion or adoption of a specific decision may cause a conflict of interests, etc. [16, p. 11].

The national legislation of Ukraine defines certain rules and restrictions on receiving gifts, for the persons specified in clauses 1, 2 of Part 1 of Art. 3 of the Law of Ukraine "On Prevention of Corruption" dated October 14, 2014 No. 1700-VII [17], also administrative responsibility is provided for in the Code of Ukraine about Administrative Offenses (Article 172-5) [18] The National Agency on Corruption Prevention [19] provides certain recommendations and examples of the application of legal restrictions on the receipt by public officials of gifts, which are accepted in conditions of conflicts of interests, however, in practice, problematic issues remain in their application, there is ambiguous judicial practice on these issues. Thus, violations of the legal restrictions on the receipt of gifts by officials in the field of health care, which are subject to the Law of Ukraine "On Prevention of Corruption" [17] entail administrative responsibility, provided for in Art. 172-5 of the Code of Ukraine about Administrative Offenses [18].

However, inept application of legislation leads to certain troubles. As an example, the court decision in case No. 727/286/18 on bringing to administrative responsibility the senior nurse of the city clinical hospital under Art. 172-5 of the Code of Ukraine about Administrative Offences (violation of restrictions on receiving a gift). The grounds for opening the proceedings were "repeated facts of the senior nurse receiving gifts from subordinates as a sign of gratitude for her conscientious performance of her functional duties", which were recorded in the administrative offense protocol [20, p. 106]. At the court hearing, it was proved that the gifts were received in connection with the performance of official duties. Consequently, subject to the exercise of such powers, officials of legal entities of public law in the field of healthcare are subjects of administrative liability for offenses related to corruption. However, for a corruption offense to exist, a causal connection must be established between the act (receiving a gift) and the performance by the person who committed it of the functions of the state or local government. If there is no such connection (and here it is absent), there is no basis for administrative liability under 172-5 of the Code of Ukraine about Administrative Offenses [18].

At the legislative level, national legislation provides for the term "gift" (Article 1). An explanation of this term is provided in the Law of Ukraine "On Prevention of Corruption" dated October 14, 2014 No. 1700-VII. It includes: 1) money, 2) other property; 3) advantages; 4) benefits; 5) services; 6) intangible assets. Law of Ukraine "On Prevention of Corruption" dated October 14, 2014 No. 1700-VII also stipulates that restrictions on receiving gifts consist of three categories, namely: 1) prohibited; 2) permitted with certain restrictions; 3) allowed. In Ukraine, at the legislative level, the conditions, grounds and extent of the "legality" of the gifts receipt are provided. Based on the provisions [17], [8, p. 391], [11, p. 227], [1], of recommendations of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention [19], the components of a conflict of interests (real, potential) are: 1) private interest, 2) discretionary official or representative powers (at that, the professional duties of a public official and his/her powers as a manager are also important), 3) the presence of a conflict between private interest and powers. In the presence of such conditions, a decision made by an official in favor of the person from whom he/she or his/her relatives received a gift is considered to have been made under conditions of a conflict of interests and is subject to cancellation. In particular, O.M. Shevchuk points out that a conflict of interest in public officials is a situation in which a public official, performing his/her duties, has a private interest (personal interest), which although not necessarily causes the adoption of an illegal decision or the commission of an illegal act in the sphere of public service, but can lead to this in the case of making decisions, or performing or not performing actions when executing official powers [7, p. 425].

Let's find out the definition of the "unlawful benefit" and "gift" categories, which are given in Art. 1 of the Law of Ukraine "On Prevention of Corruption" [17]. "Unlawful benefit" is money or other property, advantages, benefits, services, intangible assets, any other benefits of an intangible or non-monetary nature that are promised, offered, given or received without legal grounds; recall that the category "gift" is money or other property, advantages, benefits, services, intangible assets that are given/received free of charge or at a price lower than the minimum market price [17]. Therefore, the difference between them lies in the fact that in the case of unlawful benefit, money or other property, advantages, benefits, services, intangible assets, any other benefits of an intangible or non-monetary nature are obtained without legal grounds.

In some European countries, mandatory declaration of gifts by persons holding political positions, and in some countries - by all public officials, has been introduced at the legislative level. Thus, in Poland, the obligation to declare gifts is provided for persons holding political positions, as well as local elected positions, in Hungary - for members of Parliament, in Great Britain, Spain and Germany - for members of the Government and persons holding political positions, and in Latvia - for all public officials. Members of the German Parliament must declare gifts if their value exceeds 5,000 euros [1]. In addition, it is generally prohibited in Finland for public officials to receive any gifts or entertainment services from persons whose cases are under consideration, if this may affect the consideration of such cases. An absolute ban on gifts for public officials is provided for in French law, with the threat of being prosecuted in case of violation of the ban. Similar prohibitions are characteristic of the legislation of Canada, China and other foreign countries [21, p. 93]. In particular, in France, on December 29, 2011, Law No. 2011-2012 "On strengthening the safety of medicines and health care products" was adopted, which establishes a fine of 30,000 euros for an expert who hid information about his/her connections with the commercial sphere [22, с. 169].

In Singapore, both the public and private sectors are restricted from receiving business-related gifts. The "due diligence" approach, which is usually considered as integrity, involves an original rule that can be defined as "no gifts and displays of generosity" [23, p. 16]. In Singapore, a public official who has a specific private interest is prohibited from participating in any discussion, vote or decision on a matter of interest, from attending any meeting or working session in a matter where he/she has a conflict of interest, he/she is not authorized to sign any document on a financial transaction in a case where such public official has a potential interest; he/she cannot be a participant in any collegial meeting if it provides for a quorum to make a decision in the event of a conflict of interest [24].

In Great Britain, gift restrictions refer to the general regulation of the principles of integrity, possible payments related to "generous hospitality" where each case will be evaluated according to special criteria. [25, p. 59]. In the United States of America, a gift is anything that can be expressed in monetary terms, namely: money, goods, various services (for example, such as travel, hotel accommodation, meals, tuition fees, etc.). Exceptions to this rule are clearly defined at the legislative level (for example, soft drinks or coffee, greeting cards or similar souvenirs of insignificant value are not considered gifts) [1]. In Italy, members of the Italian government and their relatives are prohibited from keeping for personal possession so-called "entertainment gifts" received from official occasions worth more than 300 euros. Gifts worth more than 300 euros remain at the disposal of the administration or members of the government can keep them, provided they pay the difference (over 300 euros). And since 2013, the limit of the permissible value of "courtesy gifts of small value" is equivalent to a maximum of 150 euros [26].

Conclusion

The condition for restriction on receiving gifts for persons engaged in activities related to the performance of the state or local self-government functions in national legislation is exhaustive. At that, there should obligatory be an appropriate legal connection of such persons with public functions in the understanding of “activities related to the performance of functions of the state or local self-government”. According to the legislation of Ukraine, a conflict of interest in the above-mentioned persons may arise not at any time of receiving a gift, but only if this occurs before or during the performance of their duties in the interests of the grantor. For categories of public officials, national legislation should provide clearer parameters for receiving gifts related to "hospitality", where each case should be assessed according to special criteria. Such criteria will help to "highlight" the "lack of transparency" in the receipt of such gifts or the concealment of improper benefits.

gift public official hospitality

References

1.Shevchuk O. Conflict of interest in the activities of judges in Ukraine and the European Union: a comparative legal study. /O. Shevchuk, O. Lysodyed, N. Matyukhina, O. Babaieva, S. Davydenko. Juridical Tribune Journal. 2023. Vol. 13. Issue. 2. P. 261-282. [in English].

2. Oderzhannia podarunkiv osobamy, upovnovazhenymy na vykonannia funktsii derzhavy abo mistsevoho samovriaduvannia: roziasnennia Ministerstva yustytsii Ukrainy vid 28.07.2011. [Receipt of gifts by persons authorized to perform the functions of the state or local self-government: clarification of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine dated July 28, 2011]. [in Ukrainian].

3. Uhoda pro asotsiatsiieiu mizh Ukrainoiu, z odniiei storony, ta Yevropeiskym Soiuzom, Yevropeiskym spivtovarystvom z atomnoi enerhii i yikhnimy derzhavamy-chlenamy, z inshoi storony. [ Association Agreement between Ukraine, on the one hand, and the European Union, the European Atomic Energy Community and their member states, on the other hand]. [in Ukrainian].

4. Ukaz Prezydenta Ukrainy «Pro Natsionalnu antykoruptsiinu stratehiiu na 2011-2015 roky». [Decree of the President of Ukraine «On the National Anti-Corruption Strategy for 2011-2015»]. zakon.rada.gov.ua. [in Ukrainian].

5. Pro zatverdzhennya Derzhavnoyi antykoruptsiynoyi prohramy na 2023-2025 roky: postanova Kabinetu Ministriv Ukrayiny vid 4 bereznya 2023 roku № 220. [On the approval of the State Anti-Corruption Program for 2023-2025: Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine of March 4, 2023 № 220] [in Ukrainian].

6. Rivchachenko S.V. (2017) Zapobihannya ta vrehulyuvannya konfliktu interesiv yak sposib protydiyi koruptsiyi. [Prevention and settlement of conflicts of interest as a way of countering corruption]. Extended abstract of candidate's thesis. Zaporizhzhia, ZNU [in Ukrainian].

7. Shevchuk O.M. Conflict of interests in the public services in Ukraine: administrative and legal regulation and problems of realization. Institutionalization of public relations in the fight against corruption: the experience of countries of Eastern and Western legal traditions (universal theoretical framework for the relevant anti-corruption law of Ukraine). Collective monograph. Volume 2.Tallinn: Izdevnieciba “Baltija Publishing”, 2019. 448 p.

8. Shevchuk O., Yarova A. Prevention and settlement of conflicts of interest in health care of Ukraine as an administrative legal institute Juridical Tribune, 2022. 12 (3), pp. 387-398. [in English].

9. Panteleiev S.M. (2021) Administratyvno-pravove rehuliuvannia antykoruptsiinykh zaboron ta obmezhen u diialnosti politseiskykh v Ukraini [ Administrative and legal regulation of anti-corruption prohibitions and restrictions on the activities of police officers in Ukraine]. Candidate's thesis. Odesa: Odessa State University of Internal Affairs [in Ukrainian].

10. Lupu A.K. (2021) Administratyvno-pravove zabezpechennia dotrymannia antykoruptsiinykh obmezhen v publichnii sluzhbi Ukrainy. Candidate's thesis. Zaporizhzhia, ZNU [in Ukrainian].

11. Pastukh I.D. (2021) Zapobihannia ta vrehuliuvannia konfliktu interesiv u publichno-pravovykh vidnosynakh zasobamy administratyvnoho prava [Prevention and settlement of conflict of interests in public law relations by means of administrative law]. Doctor's thesis. Kyiv: NAIAU [in Ukrainian].

12. Oleshko O.M. (2014) Zarubizhnyi dosvid zapobihannia i vrehuliuvannia konfliktu interesiv na derzhavnii sluzhbi. [Foreign experience of prevention and settlement of conflicts of interest in public service ] Teoriia tapraktyka derzhavnoho upravlinnia. 3.:263-271. [in Ukrainian].

13. Konventsiia OON proty koruptsii, pryiniata Rezoliutsiieiu 58/4 Heneralnoi Asamblei vid 31 zhovtnia 2003 r. [ The UN Convention against Corruption, adopted by Resolution 58/4 of the General Assembly of October 31, 2003]. zakon.rada.gov.ua Retrieved from: [in Ukrainian].

14. Mizhnarodnyi kodeks povedinky derzhavnykh posadovykh osib: mizhnarodnyi dokument vid 23.07.1996 r. № 995_788. [International code of conduct for public officials] [in Ukrainian].

15. Kodeks povedinky posadovykh osib z pidtrymannia pravoporiadku: rezoliutsiia 34/169 Heneralnoi Asamblei OON vid 17.12.1979 r. [Code of conduct for law enforcement officials: resolution 34/169 of the UN General Assembly dated December 17, 1979] [in Ukrainian].

16. Polityky i praktyky zapobihannia konfliktu interesiv u deviaty krainakh YeS. Porivnialnyi ohliad. Dokument SIGMA № 36. (2006). [Policies and practices of conflict of interest prevention in nine EU countries. Comparative review. SIGMA Paper № 36.] Orhanizatsiia Ekonomichnoho Spivrobitnytstva i Rozvytku, [in Ukrainian].

17. Zakon Ukrainy «Pro zapobihannia koruptsii» [Law of Ukraine "On Prevention of Corruption"] [in Ukrainian].

18. Kodeks Ukrainy pro administratyvni pravoporushennia: Zakon Ukrainy [ Code of Ukraine on administrative offenses]. [in Ukrainian].

19. Metodychni rekomendatsii Natsionalnoho ahentstva z pytan zapobihannia koruptsii «Shchodo zastosuvannia okremykh polozhen Zakonu Ukrainy «Pro zapobihannia koruptsii» stosovno zapobihannia ta vrehuliuvannia konfliktu interesiv, dotrymannia obmezhen shchodo zapobihannia koruptsii» [Methodological recommendations of the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption "Regarding the application of certain provisions of the Law of Ukraine "On the Prevention of Corruption" regarding the prevention and settlement of conflicts of interest, compliance with restrictions on the prevention of corruption"]. [in Ukrainian].

20. Melnyk O.D. (2019) Okremi aspekty administratyvnoi vidpovidalnosti posadovykh osib zakladiv okhorony zdorovia za administratyvni pravoporushennia poviazani iz koruptsiieiu. [Certain aspects of the administrative responsibility of officials of health care institutions for administrative offenses are related to corruption.]. Kharkiv: Pravo. [in Ukrainian].

21. Kolomoiets T.O., Kukurudz R.O. (2018) Podarunky dlia publichnykh sluzhbovtsiv v Ukraini: zaborona, obmezhennia chy dozvil yak optymalna model pravovoho rehuliuvannia [Gifts for public officials in Ukraine: prohibition, restriction or permission as an optimal model of legal regulation ]. Naukovyi visnykpublichnoho tapryvatnohoprava. 2: 92-96. [in Ukrainian].

22. Butler D. France toughens conflict rules. Nature 2011. V. 478. P. 169.

23. Paact: Practical Anti-Corruption Guide for Businesses in Singapore. Singapore: Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau, 2017. 50 p. [in English].

24. Public Sector (Governance) Act 2018.

25. The Prevention of Corruption Act. [in English].

26. Enforcement Decree of the ACRC Act. [in English].

Література

1. Shevchuk O. Conflict of interest in the activities of judges in Ukraine and the European Union: a comparative legal study. /O. Shevchuk, O. Lysodyed, N. Matyukhina, O. Babaieva, S. Davydenko. Juridical Tribune Journal. 2023. Vol. 13. Issue. 2. P. 261-282.

2. Одержання подарунків особами, уповноваженими на виконання функцій держави або місцевого самоврядування: роз'яснення Міністерства юстиції України від 28.07.2011.

3. Угода про асоціацією між Україною, з однієї сторони, та Європейським Союзом, Європейським співтовариством з атомної енергії і їхніми державами-членами, з іншої сторони.

4. Про Національну антикорупційну стратегію на 2011-2015 роки: Указ Президента України: від 21 жовтня 2011 року N 1001/2011. Офіц. вісн. України. 2011 р. №83. ст. 3020.

5. Про затвердження Державної антикорупційної програми на 2023-2025 роки: постанова КМ України від 4 березня 2023 р. № 220. Офіційний вісник України. 2023. № 31. Ст.1685.

6. Рівчаченко С.В. Запобігання та врегулювання конфлікту інтересів як спосіб протидії корупції: автореферат. ... канд. юрид. наук. Запоріжжя, 2017. 24 с.

7. Shevchuk O.M. Conflict of interests in the public services in Ukraine: administrative and legal regulation and problems of realization. Institutionalization of public relations in the fight against corruption: the experience of countries of Eastern and Western legal traditions (universal theoretical framework for the relevant anti-corruption law of Ukraine). Collective monograph. Volume 2.Tallinn : Izdevnieciba “Baltija Publishing”, 2019. 448 p.

8. Shevchuk O., Yarova A. Prevention and settlement of conflicts of interest in health care of Ukraine as an administrative legal institute Juridical Tribune, 2022. 12 (3), pp. 387-398.

9. Пантелеєв С.М. Адміністративно-правове регулювання антикорупційних заборон та обмежень у діяльності поліцейських в Україні: дисерт. .докт. філософії за спец.: 081- Право. Одеський державний університет внутрішніх справ, Одеса, 2021. 270 с.

10. Лупу А.К. Адміністративно-правове забезпечення дотримання антикорупційних обмежень в публічній службі України: дис. ... канд. юр. наук: 12.00.07. К.: ЗУНУ, 2021. 216 с.

11. Пастух І.Д. Запобігання та врегулювання конфлікту інтересів у публічно-правових відносинах засобами адміністративного права. дисерт. . на докт. юрид. наук. спец.: 12.00.07. НАВС. 2021. 518 с.

12. Олешко О.М. Зарубіжний досвід запобігання і врегулювання конфлікту інтересів на державній службі. Теорія та практика державного управління. 2014. Вип. 3. С. 263-271.

13. Конвенція ООН проти корупції, прийнята Резолюцією 58/4 Генеральної Асамблеї від 31 жовтня 2003 р. Відомості Верховної Ради України. 2007. № 49.

14. Міжнародний кодекс поведінки державних посадових осіб: міжнародний документ від 23.07.1996 р. № 995_788.

15. Кодекс поведінки посадових осіб з підтримання правопорядку: резолюція 34/169 Генеральної Асамблеї ООН від 17.12.1979 р.

16. Політики і практики запобігання конфлікту інтересів у дев'яти країнах ЄС. Порівняльний огляд. Документ SIGMA № 36. Організація Економічного Співробітництва і Розвитку, 2006. 45 с.

17. Про запобігання корупції: Закон України від 14.102014 р. № 1700-VII.

18. Кодекс України про адміністративні правопорушення: Закон України від 7.12.1984 р. № 8073-Х. Відомості Верховної Ради УРСР. 1984..№ 52. Ст. 1122.

19. Щодо застосування окремих положень Закону України «Про запобігання корупції» стосовно запобігання та врегулювання конфлікту інтересів, дотримання обмежень щодо запобігання корупції. Методичні рекомендації НАЗК від 21.10.2022 № 13.

20. Мельник О.Д. Окремі аспекти адміністративної відповідальності посадових осіб закладів охорони здоров'я за адміністративні правопорушення пов'язані із корупцією. С. 100-108. Реформування системи охорони здоров'я: корупційні ризики та способи їх усунення: матеріали «круглого столу» (м. Харків, 5 груд. 2019 р.) / ред. кол.: Н.О. Гуторова, В.М. Пашков, В.С. Батиргареєва. Харків: Право, 2019. 124 c.

21. Коломоєць Т.О., Кукурудз Р.О. Подарунки для публічних службовців в Україні: заборона, обмеження чи дозвіл як оптимальна модель правового регулювання. Науковий вісник публічного та приватного права. 2018. Вип. №2. С. 92-96.

22. Butler D. France toughens conflict rules. Nature 2011. V. 478. P. 169.

23. Paact: Practical Anti-Corruption Guide for Businesses in Singapore. Singapore: Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau, 2017. 50 р.

24. Public Sector (Governance) Act 2018

25. The Prevention of Corruption Act.

26. Enforcement Decree of the ACRC Act.

Размещено на Allbest.ru