TRENDS AND PROSPECTS OF INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT OF ANTI-CORRUPTION POLICY
Keywords:anti-corruption institutions, economic results, anti-corruption reform
The article considers the preconditions of anti-corruption reform, the essence, economic results and the current situation. Recommendations are also given that should be followed to improve the situation. Prior to the start of the implementation of the anti-corruption reform, there was corruption, which in fact was not prosecuted in any way due to the fact that the judicial system of Ukraine itself was corrupt. The anti-corruption reform established several independent institutions to investigate and convict corruption offenses, including the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office, the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court, and the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption. These institutions have been called upon to be new independent bodies that receive appeals of corruption violations, investigate cases, and pass sentences. Also, these bodies form and coordinate anti-corruption policy in Ukraine, organize work to prevent and detect corruption in local governments, enterprises, institutions and organizations. Since these institutions were just starting to work, the first few years the economic results were insignificant, but gradually the amount of compensation and terminated illegal contracts became solid. Despite the economic results of the anti-corruption reform, there is a significant outflow of foreign investment for the first time in five years. The main reason for this is distrust of the judiciary and the prevalence of corruption. Despite the economic benefits of fighting corruption, corruption is in fact covered by top government officials, rather than any support from anti-corruption institutions. The article gives some recommendations on how to act in this situation. In particular, it is called upon to support and strengthen Ukraine's anti-corruption infrastructure; pass real sentences on real corrupt officials so that society and investors are convinced that the government is resolutely fighting corruption; punish top corrupt officials, regardless of position, to stop corruption at the highest level, where it is just reaching its peak.