CC BY
1
Nurmatova N.N.
Department of Social Humanities of Andijan State Medical Institute
THE MAIN FEATURES OF CORRUPTION AND THE NEED TO FIGHT
AGAINST IT
Abstract. This article focuses on the main features of corruption and the need to fight against it. In the article, the author distinguished the types of corruption from each other and revealed the factors that lead to its occurrence.
Key words: corruption, anti-corruption campaign, legal norms, international documents, state disclosure, economic factors.
Depending on the field of activity, the following types of corruption should be distinguished: Corruption in public administration. Parliamentary corruption. Corruption in enterprises. Corruption in the sphere of public administration occurs because it is possible for a civil servant (official) to manage public resources and make decisions not in the interests of the state and society, but based on his own selfish motives. Depending on the hierarchical position of civil servants, corruption can be divided into top and bottom. The first covers politicians, higher and middle bureaucrats and is associated with making decisions that have a high price (formulas of laws, government orders, changes in forms of ownership, etc.). The second is common at the middle and lower levels and is associated with constant, routine interaction between officials and citizens (fines, registrations, etc.). Often both parties interested in a corrupt transaction belong to the same government organization. For example, when an official gives a bribe to his boss because the latter covers up the corrupt actions of the bribe-giver, this is also corruption, which is usually called "vertical". It usually acts as a bridge between top and bottom corruption. This is especially dangerous because it indicates the transition of corruption from the stage of isolated acts to the stage of taking root organized forms. Most experts who study corruption include the purchase of votes during elections.
The most simplified classification is proposed by N.A. Kataev and L.V. Serdyuk, who distinguishes purely criminal (mainly economic) and political corruption, which, in turn, they divide into deviant and criminal behavior. A more complex classification was proposed by M. Johnston. He identified several types of corruption: bribes of officials in the field of trade (for the sale of illegally produced products, inflating the quality of goods, etc.); relations in patronage systems, including the patronage of "bosses" on the basis of fellow countrymen, family, and party principles; friendship and nepotism; as well as the so-called crisis corruption, due to the fact that entrepreneurs are forced to work in conditions of extreme risk, when decisions of government bodies can lead to significant changes for business and therefore these decisions become the subject of trade. A number
of authors, when considering corruption, usually highlight its political and economic functions. Corruption in this case is determined by the degree of economic and political development, and not by political culture. It reflects the discord between old and new norms and facilitates adaptation to changes in all areas of society. Certain types of corruption contribute to the formation of important connections in the process of building political coalitions that guarantee social change, and play a role in the consolidation or restructuring of class differences. A. Heidenheimer divided corruption into white, gray and black.
The first denotes practices regarding which there is agreement in public opinion: these actions are not considered reprehensible. 13 They are essentially integrated into the culture and are not perceived as a problem. Black corruption is the object of a different consensus: actions are condemned by all sectors of society. A. Heidenheimer called gray corruption those manifestations regarding which there is no agreement. It is around gray corruption that scandals arise. Domestic researcher E. Ozhiganov defines the following types of corruption: bureaucratic and political, coercive and coordinated, centralized and decentralized. Y. Kuzminov distinguishes between corruption in a broad and narrow sense. The first is associated with an official's violation of his duties for the sake of material reward, the second with bribery and bureaucratic entrepreneurship. The most common types of corruption in accordance with this classification are: bribery and corruption, corruption of the "lower" and "higher", corruption in the state (municipal) and non-state sectors. Thus, both foreign and domestic science has accumulated some experience in classifying corruption. However, none of the classifications of corruption presented today, including legislation and the practice of its application, can be considered to meet the needs of highly effective counteraction to this phenomenon. All of the above approaches to the classification of corruption are characterized by extreme diversity, as well as the lack of a clear definition of criteria, which does not fully contribute to the analysis of corruption and its manifestations in modern political practice. It seems to us that a more substantive classification of corruption is based on strictly defined criteria (grounds). These, in particular, in relation to the subject of the study are: areas of manifestation of corruption, the status of its subjects, its level, as well as the degree of public danger of this phenomenon. 14 Since corruption as a social phenomenon is most manifested in such basic spheres of people's lives as politics and economics, it is obviously legitimate to define such basic types of corruption as political and economic. A special type is political corruption. Most experts who study corruption include the purchase of votes during elections. There really are all the characteristic signs of corruption, with the exception of the presence of an official. Define political corruption as the acts of politicians, candidates or persons associated with them during preparation and holding elections, appointing or approving a certain public position, as well as carrying out other political activities aimed at obtaining or maintaining a certain position or status, both for oneself and for other persons, carried out through the use of official powers - both one's own
and other persons, the use of one's own or others' material resources contrary to the interests of the state, society and other persons in order to obtain political gain, personal enrichment, as well as in favor of narrow group interests and political parties. At the same time, it is obvious that manifestations of political corruption go beyond the electoral struggle. Politics, as the practice of government, and corruption have always been closely linked. Moreover, corruption often becomes either a "trigger" for deep political changes.. Any government structure is objectively (to a greater or lesser extent) fraught with corruption. Therefore, it is advisable to consider political corruption as a broader phenomenon.
Another specific feature of economic corruption is that a significant amount of abuse is associated with the use of powers in the field of control and distribution of financial flows. This type of corruption is also called "corrupt services" in a broad sense. In this way, there is a "sale" of the power resource, as well as the use of the power resource for the purpose of appropriating other state resources, which determines the close relationship between economic and political corruption. Analysis of the results of numerous studies on this issue allows us to classify the following phenomena as the most significant factors of economic corruption: a critically high level of polarization of the population by income level; high share of the shadow economy; widespread inclusion in economic circulation of the practice of "laundering" illegally obtained income; excessively high taxes for commercial organizations. One of the important incentives for economic corruption in the non-state sector is the "complex of state parasitism". This phenomenon is characteristic of both domestic and foreign political practice. At the same time, in Russia, the "complex of state parasitism" is due to the fact that a significant number of commercial organizations that emerged during privatization strive at all costs to use budget resources in their own interests. Because otherwise, such enterprises will be forced to exist only at their own economic risk. Economically unjustified privileges become a kind of drug, without which they will no longer be able to function normally. And such privileges can only be obtained by paying a bribe. Thus, the most common types of corruption are: economic and political. At the same time, corruption as a complex systemic social phenomenon is not limited to these two types, which requires the introduction of additional criteria for classification. These, as noted above, are the status of subjects, level of functioning, degree of public danger and some others. According to the status of the subjects, the following types of corruption are distinguished: a) corruption in government bodies; b) corruption in the private sector. Corruption in government bodies is extremely developed due to the fact that it covers all government bodies (executive, representative and judicial). It is based on the unlawful and selfish use of government resources, including in the non-state sector at the local government level.
Another specific feature of economic corruption is that a significant amount of abuse is associated with the use of powers in the field of control and distribution of financial flows. This type of corruption is also called "corrupt services" in a
broad sense. In this way, there is a "sale" of the power resource, as well as the use of the power resource for the purpose of appropriating other state resources, which determines the close relationship between economic and political corruption.
References:
1. Мирзаюнусова З. И. Расулова М. Х. (2011) Роль образа исторической личности в воспитании гармонично развитой личности. молодежь и наука: реальность и будущее Материалы IV Международной научно -практической конференции,1, 572-573.
2. Расулов, И. И. (2016). Наречные фразеологизмы русского языка с имплицитно выраженным значением. In Молодежь и наука: реальность и будущее (pp. 275-277).
3. Расулов, И. И. (2016). Особенности учебного перевода фразеологических сочетаний. In Молодежь и наука: реальность и будущее (pp. 330-332).
4. Urokova, O. J. (2016). Chulpon's creative work in the legacy of the aesthetical thought of mankind. Theoretical & Applied Science., (9), 183-188.
5. Jamoliddinovna, U. O. (2020). The praise of nature and the universe in Novalis romance. EPRA International Journal of Research and Development (IJRD) Volume, 5, 274-275.
