3.1.1.2.1.
Developing and submitting to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine a draft law supplementing the Law of Ukraine On Prevention of Corruption with a new section, which:
1) defines a single unified list of violations of the requirements of the Law, which constitute manifestations of gross violation of the ethical code of conduct and grounds for disciplinary liability of officials performing the functions of state or local self-government (irrespective of their category);
2) stipulates that separate grounds for bringing such persons to disciplinary liability shall be a legally binding court decision that imposed on them an administrative penalty for committing a corruption-related offense, or discontinued proceedings in a case involving such a violation due to an expired statute of limitations for imposing the administrative penalty, or relief of administrative liability granted due to the negligible nature of the offense;
3) obligates managers of government agencies and local self-government bodies to inform the National Agency about any discovered violations of the Law and initiation of disciplinary proceedings in connection with such violations, as well as about decisions made as a result of such disciplinary proceedings;
4) stipulates that failure to take measures towards bringing the officials performing the functions of state or local self-government to administrative liability for violations of the requirements of the Law, as well as failure to comply with the legislative requirements mandating the unconditional dismissal of such individuals (in the instances expressly prescribed by the law) shall constitute a disciplinary offense;
5) defines the unified (general) grounds for disciplinary liability of officials performing the functions of state or local self-government where they have violated the requirements of the Law, which stipulate that:
the officials performing the functions of state or local self-government who have violated the requirements of the Law shall face disciplinary liability irrespective of whether or not a different kind of legal liability is prescribed for this violation, and irrespective of whether or not this violation is being examined as part of judicial proceedings under criminal, administrative, or civil law, irrespective of the stage of examination, and whether or not a final decision has been made in such cases;
the absence of the National Agency’s opinion on whether or not the actions of this person show signs of corruption or a corruption-related crime shall not preclude these persons from being brought to disciplinary liability;
the fact that an official performing the functions of state or local self-government has faced administrative, criminal, or civil liability for violations of the requirements of the Law shall not relieve this person of disciplinary liability for the same violation;
the immediate superiors as well as managers of agencies and institutions employing the individuals who committed such disciplinary offenses are obligated to initiate a relevant disciplinary proceeding within three business days from the day when the relevant grounds were discovered;
the term of disciplinary proceedings in cases involving violations of the requirements of the Law shall be at least one year from the day when this proceeding was initiated;
the statute of limitations for imposing disciplinary penalties for violations of the requirements of the Law shall be no less than three years from the day when the relevant offense was committed;
certain mandatory requirements with respect to the procedure for making the final decision based on the outcome of the disciplinary proceeding, as well as the principles of choosing the kind and mount of the disciplinary penalty, shall be prescribed by the Law;
6) stipulates the following unconditional grounds for dismissal (outside of the disciplinary liability procedure) of all categories of officials performing the functions of state or local self-government:
a legally binding court verdict that imposed on them a criminal penalty for committing corruption or a corruption-related offense, as well as a court ruling that relieves such individuals of criminal liability;
a legally binding court decision to hold them administratively or criminally liable for committing corruption or a corruption-related offense, which imposed a penalty or punishment on the official in the form of a prohibition from filling positions or engaging in activities involving the performance of the functions of state or local self-government;
a legally binding court decision that has found the assets of such individuals or assets acquired by third parties on their behalf (as well as in other cases stipulated in Article 290 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine) to constitute unjust enrichment, and has ordered their confiscation in favor of the state;
7) establishes the rules of alignment of the provisions of the Law dealing with disciplinary liability with the legislative provisions that define the general grounds and procedure for bringing different categories of officials performing the functions of state or local self-government to disciplinary liability, according to which:
such individuals shall face disciplinary liability in the manner prescribed by legislation on the disciplinary liability of the relevant category of individuals (general regulation), taking into account the specific considerations prescribed by the Law (special regulations);
if the same legal relationships are regulated differently, the special provisions of the Law shall be applied as they prevail over the general provisions of legislation.
The main implementer: National Agency on Corruption Prevention
*3.1.1.2.2. Drafting and submitting to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine a draft law on amendments to the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses, which institutes administrative liability for failure to bring officials authorized to carry out the functions of state or local self-government to disciplinary liability for violations of the requirements of the Law, as well as for failing to comply with the requirements of the law mandating the unconditional dismissal of such officials (in the cases expressly provided by law)
The main implementer: National Agency on Corruption Prevention
The following has taken effect:
a) the law on amendments to the Law of Ukraine On the Prevention of Corruption, which:
obligates managers of government agencies and local self-government bodies to inform the National Agency about any discovered violations of the Law of Ukraine On Prevention of Corruption and initiation of disciplinary proceedings in connection with such violations, as well as about decisions made as a result of such disciplinary proceedings (10 percent);
stipulates that failure to take measures towards bringing the officials performing the functions of state or local self-government to administrative liability for violations of the requirements of the Law of Ukraine On Prevention of Corruption, as well as failure to comply with the legislative requirements mandating the unconditional dismissal of such individuals (in the instances expressly prescribed by the law) shall constitute a disciplinary offense (10 percent);
b) the law on amendments to the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses, which institutes administrative liability for failure to bring officials authorized to carry out the functions of state or local self-government to disciplinary account for violations of the requirements of the Law of Ukraine On Prevention of Corruption, as well as for failing to comply with the requirements of the law mandating the unconditional dismissal of such officials (in the cases expressly provided by law) (20 percent)
Upon discovery of each fact that managers of the relevant agencies have failed to take measures towards bringing their subordinates to disciplinary account, the National Agency shall initiate the issue of bringing such managers to disciplinary and administrative liability.
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 1 of clause 3.1.1.2 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 1 of clause 3.1.1.2 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 1 of clause 3.1.1.2 as high or very high (10 percent).