ESR
3.2.1.2. Based on the findings of the analysis and consolidation of the practice of bringing perpetrators to justice for administrative offenses involving corruption, the relevant prohibitions have been systematically improved
Problem solving:
3.2.1. Some of the rules, prohibitions, and restrictions established by anticorruption legislation are not backed up by legal liability measures. Articles 1724—1729, 21215, 21221 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses contain a number of shortcomings that significantly impair their injunctive and preventive potential as well as the effectiveness of the National Agency, the National Police, prosecutorial authorities and courts.
Deadlines for all measures within ESR
Implementation of SACP measures within ESR
Implementation of SACP measures within the scope of the Problem by main main performers
National Agency on Corruption Prevention
National Police of Ukraine
Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine
Supreme Court
Summarized general information on Measures
Indicators of achievement of ESR
Total number of indicators – 3
Indicators fully achieved – 0
Partially achieved indicators – 0
Indicators with a score of 0% – 3
Summarized general information about Achievement Indicators
№ | Indicators | Weight (%) |
---|---|---|
1 | An analysis of the legislation and consolidation of the practice of prosecuting entities subject to the Law for administrative offenses involving corruption in 2014-2023, with a focus on the consistency, completeness, and legal correctness of the legislative definition of the grounds for such liability. | 20% |
2 | The law on systemic improvement of the grounds for prosecuting perpetrators for administrative offenses involving corruption has come into force. | 50% |
3 |
the results of the expert survey have demonstrated that: a) more than 75 percent of experts on the formulation and implementation of the legal policy evaluate the quality of legal regulation indicated in subclause 2 of clause 3.2.1.2 as high or very high (30 percent); b) more than 50 percent of experts on the formulation and implementation of the legal policy evaluate the quality of legal regulation indicated in subclause 2 of clause 3.2.1.2 as high or very high (20 percent); c) more than 25 percent of experts on the formulation and implementation of the legal policy evaluate the quality of legal regulation indicated in subclause 2 of clause 3.2.1.2 as high or very high (10 percent). |
30% |