“Corruption has become one of the regular and inevitable things in the political and economic system of the country, however, it is modified by reducing its “bottom” part among the common population and maintaining or even increasing the “top” part among the political elites of the country”, said Marat Shibutov, representative of the Association of cross-border cooperation in Kazakhstan (Almaty, Kazakhstan), in an article written exclusively for cabar.asia.
Definition of corruption
The Law “On Combating Corruption” of July 2, 1998, N 267, provides the following definition of corruption: “Under the present law, corruption is the process of direct or indirect taking without legal provision of property benefits and advantages by persons who perform public functions or by persons equal to them, using their official powers and related opportunities, or other use of their powers to obtain property benefits, as well as the process of bribery of such persons by unlawful giving the mentioned benefits and advantages to them by individuals and legal entities”.
In everyday understanding of citizens, corruption is primarily associated with bribery, and mainly with taking rather than with giving. Since the days of the Soviet Union, other aspects of corruption – protectionism, abuse of authority, abuse of official position – are associated with the concept of “cronyism”, and Kazakhstan citizens are much more loyal to cronyism than to bribes and especially their extortion.
But in general, it should be noted that, unlike in the media sphere, in real life, the issue of corruption is not so relevant. This is evident from the complaints that people have sent to state agencies [1]:
- Of 2,757,093 appeals made by individuals, only 2,385 touched on corruption, and of 97,584 complaints sent by individuals, only 900 touched on corruption. It is 0.086% and 0.92% respectively.
- Of 764,251 appeals made by legal entities, only 336 touched on corruption, and of 22 915 complaints of legal entities, only 101 were about corruption. It is 0.044% and 0.44% respectively.
So, the issue of corruption is quite peripheral for Kazakhstani people. For comparison, in 2014, a key topic of the complaints for individuals was the topic of investigation and inquiry – 15,088 complaints. As can be seen from the chart, the issue of corruption is not included even in the 10 most important topics for complaints in Kazakhstan.
According to the Committee on Legal Statistics and Special Records of the General Prosecutor of Kazakhstan
In fact, for Kazakhstan citizens, corruption is not so important if it does not affect or is not a cause of the deterioration of certain public services and is not the cause of social problems. In fact, many people view it as an opportunity to receive public services faster. Thus, we should not simplify the impact of corruption, as this is a very complex phenomenon.
In order to show the dynamics, I took data from 2008 to 2014 (there was not data in 2009; and the data for 2012 were only for 6 months, I have multiplied them by 2, so they are approximate). It should be noted that there are more and more complaints of corruption from individuals, and, at the same time, there are fewer and fewer complaints of corruption from legal entities. The total number of complaints from individuals is falling, while the total number of complaints from legal entities remains at the same level. Why is this happening will be discussed later.
According to the Committee on Legal Statistics and Special Records of the General Prosecutor of Kazakhstan
Regulation of the fight against corruption
Regulation of the fight against corruption is based on the law “On Combating Corruption” and the Criminal Code, and its content is based on the Anti-Corruption Strategy of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2015-2020, approved by Presidential Decree #986 of the 26th December of 2014 (in general, programs on the fight against corruption have been adopted since 2001).
Objectives of the anti-corruption strategy are as follows:
- improving the efficiency of anti-corruption policy;
- involvement in the anti-corruption movement of the society by creating an atmosphere of “zero” tolerance for any manifestation of corruption
- reduction in the level of corruption in Kazakhstan.
Realization of these goals will be held in the following areas, activities and approaches:
– Combating corruption in the public service
- declaration by state employees of not only their income but also expenses
- gradual increase in wages and social benefits of officials according to the expansion of the financial capacity of the state
- gradual transfer of a number of state functions to the private sector – self-regulatory organizations
- provision of public services with minimum human involvement, and the maximum use of the electronic format
- in public procurement – securing a single operator, the introduction of the automated selection of goods, the improvement of procedures for taking over work and services.
- expansion of the list of public services provided to the population on a “single window” principle (through Public Service Centers)
– The introduction of the institute of public control
- holding public hearings on issues affecting the rights and interests of citizens
- public examination of the decisions of state bodies
- reports of the heads of state bodies to the public
- participation of citizens in the work of collegial bodies at state agencies
- free access to public information
- empowerment of local self-government
- monitor and control of the use of funds under the budget programs of local self-government
– Combating corruption in the quasi-public and private sectors
- Anticorruption Business Charter
- Creation of conditions to ensure transparency in the provision of services to the citizens by subjects of quasi-governmental and private sector
– Prevention of corruption in the judiciary and law enforcement agencies
- simplification of the judicial procedure, increasing its efficiency, the automation of the activity of courts
- improvement of the procedure of certification and testing of employees
- introduction in the personnel policy of law enforcement bodies of mechanisms of the competitive selection and the principle of meritocracy, existing in the system of administrative civil service
– Formation of the level of anti-corruption culture
- anti-corruption training courses to school-age children
- elimination of legal nihilism – improvement of legal literacy
- outreach to the media
- continuation of material incentives for reporting corruption
– The development of international cooperation on anti-corruption
- ensuring transparency of interactions with offshore zones
- taking over the best international practices, taking into account national specificities
- signing agreements on mutual legal assistance, extradition of criminals and return of assets with the greatest possible number of countries.
During these 5 years, in varying degrees, these measures should be implemented, and special annual national reports will make reports on it.
In addition, improvements were made to the new Penal Code, in force since January 1, 2015. Below is an analysis of sentences for corruption in the old [2] and the new [3] Penal Codes (Table 1).
As can be seen, the following changes have been made in the new penal code:
- article “Unlawful disclosure or otherwise unlawful use of data and information on operations with money and (or) other property” was omitted
- the limit of penalties, i.e. fines, are now regulated only at the upper limit, which has increased. The lower limit is no longer there.
- the fine for receiving, giving and mediation of bribery has become tied to the amount of the bribe. This allowed to use a more differentiated approach to punishment, especially small bribes.
- the upper limit of penalties did not change – prison sentences are the same.
In addition, according to the new Criminal Code, the statute of limitations does not apply to perpetrators of corruption offenses, there is a ban on probation for them, as well as a lifetime ban on the right to hold public office.
These changes have practically increased the effectiveness of the fight against corruption, as they provide for a more differentiated approach to punishment and indemnification for the government in case of large bribes. The experience has shown that it is easier for officials to collect a fine of 50 bribes than to be imprisoned.
Table 1.Punishment for corruption
| Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan of July 16, 1997 | Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan of July 3, 2014 | ||||
| # of Article | Article | Punishment min/max | # of Article | Article | Punishment min/max |
| 307 | Abuse of power | Penalty 500-1000 MCI / Imprisonment for 4-8 years | 361 | Abuse of power | Penalty up to 2000 MCI / Imprisonment for 4-8 years |
| 307-1 | Unlawful disclosure or otherwise unlawful use of data and information on operations with money and (or) other property | Penalty 500-1000 MCI / Imprisonment for up to 2 years | |||
| 308 | Exceeding authority | Penalty 200-500 MCI / Imprisonment for 5-10 years | 362 | Exceeding authority | Penalty up to 3000 MCI / Imprisonment for 5-10 years |
| 309 | Appropriation of power authorization | Penalty 50-100 MCI / Imprisonment for 1 year | 363 | Appropriation of power authorization | Penalty up too 300 MCI / Detention period of 75 days |
| 310 | The illegal participation in entrepreneurial activity | Penalty 200-400 MCI / Imprisonment for up to 4 years | 364 | The illegal participation in entrepreneurial activity | Penalty up to 1000 MCI / Imprisonment for 4 years |
| 310-1 | Impeding legal entrepreneurial activities | Penalty 500-1000 MCI / Imprisonment for 3-7 years | 365 | Impeding legal entrepreneurial activities | Penalty up to 2000 MCI / Imprisonment for 3-7 years |
| 311 | Taking bribes | Penalty 700-2000 MCI / Imprisonment for 10-15 years | 366 | Taking bribes | Penalty of 50 sizes of the bribe / Imprisonment for 10-15 years |
| 312 | Giving bribes | Penalty 700-2000 MCI / Imprisonment for 10-15 years | 367 | Giving bribes | Penalty of 20 sizes of the bribe / Imprisonment for 10-15 years |
| 313 | Mediation at bribery | Penalty 700-2000 MCI / Imprisonment for up to 6 years | 368 | Mediation at bribery | Penalty of 10 sizes of the bribe / Imprisonment up to 6 years |
| 314 | Forgery | Penalty 700-2000 MCI / Imprisonment up to 6 years | 369 | Forgery | Penalty up to 2000 MCI / Imprisonment for 3-6 years |
| 315 | Lack of action at work | Penalty 700-2000 MCI / Imprisonment for 4-8 years | 370 | Lack of action at work | Penalty up to 2000 MCI / Imprisonment for 4-8 years |
| 316 | Negligence | Penalty up to 200 MCI / Imprisonment for up to 5 years | 371 | Negligence | Penalty up to 1000 MCI / Imprisonment for up to 5 years |
In addition to penalties, the system of concepts, which are used in the determination of damages and bribes, has also changed. The concepts of “large” and “especially large” were canceled, as now the size of the fine is directly tied to the size of bribes.
Table 2. The basic concepts used in the determination of corruption crimes
| The Criminal Code of July 16, 1997 | The Criminal Code of July 3, 2014 |
| The damage caused to an individual in an amount 100 times the monthly calculation index, or the damage to the organization or to the state in the amount 1,000 times the monthly calculation index, is recognized as large damage at impeding legitimate entrepreneurial activities | |
| The damage caused to an individual in an amount 1,000 times the monthly calculation index, or the damage to an organization or to the state in the amount of 10,000 times the monthly calculation index, established by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan at the time of crime, is recognized as especially large damage at impeding legitimate entrepreneurial activities. | |
| Large bribe is the amount of money, the value of securities, other property or property benefits exceeding 500 monthly calculation indices | |
| Especially large bribe is the amount of money, the value of securities, other property or benefits of property nature, exceeding 2000 MCI. | |
| Taking the property, property rights or other proprietary benefits as a gift for the first time by a person authorized to perform public functions or an equivalent person without a preliminary agreement for the previously committed legal actions (inaction) is not a crime by virtue of insignificance and prosecuted in a disciplinary or administrative order if the value of the gift does not exceed 2 MCI. | Giving for the first time a gift in the amount or value not exceeding 2 monthly calculation indices to a person indicated in Article 366 of this Code [Bribery – ed.] for the previously committed by him/her legal actions (inaction), if the actions (inaction) committed by that person have not been caused by prior arrangement does not entail criminal liability |
The anti-corruption agency
The main agency fighting corruption in Kazakhstan is the Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan for Civil Service Affairs and Anti-Corruption. It is a body directly subordinate and accountable to the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan, is not part of the government and exercise the functions of prevention, detection, suppression and investigation of corruption crimes and offenses. [4]
Its activity is regulated, in addition to the laws of RK, by a specialized resolution on the work of the agency. The anti-corruption functions of the Agency are:
- The fight against corruption in general, from the development of policies and programs to the operational and investigative activities
- Formation of anti-corruption culture in society
The Agency staff consists of 2309 people, of whom 250 are in the central office, and 2059 people are working in 16 territorial divisions [5]. The central office consists of units engaged in the regulation of public service, investigation and prevention of corruption. The Head of the Agency is Kairat Perneshovich Kozhamzharov.
If earlier, the regulatory functions of public service and the fight against corruption belonged to two different departments, they are now unified. It turns out, the Agency is not only struggling with corruption within the state apparatus, but also can influence the causes of corruption through the regional disciplinary councils and through changing the regulations of work in agencies themselves, which gives a systemic effect. At the same time, it makes the Agency one of the most influential law enforcement agencies.
The number of corruption crimes
The number of corruption-related offenses from 2008 to 2014 remains in the range of 2000-2500 crimes per year, and their share in the total number of crimes is decreasing – it dropped 3 times – from 2% to 0.6%. The number of cases of abuse of power and official authority and forgery has decreased, but, at the same time, the number of cases of negligence has increased. Other types of crimes are at the same level.
Table 3. The number of crimes recorded in the reporting period
| 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | |
| Abuse of power (art.307) | 596 | 658 | 546 | 551 | 581 | 644 | 472 |
| Exceeding authority and official powers (art. 308) | 452 | 170 | 142 | 221 | 148 | 158 | 131 |
| Appropriation of power authorization (art.309) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Illegal participation in entrepreneurial activity (art.310) | 8 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 10 | 8 |
| Impeding lawful entrepreneurial activity (art.310-1) | 4 | 5 | 4 | ||||
| Taking bribe (art.311) | 290 | 344 | 344 | 388 | 418 | 316 | 259 |
| Giving bribe (art. 312) | 246 | 312 | 228 | 136 | 121 | 192 | 185 |
| Mediation at bribery (art. 313) | 7 | 29 | 18 | 39 | 35 | 29 | 26 |
| Forgery (art. 314) | 707 | 735 | 675 | 659 | 534 | 749 | 553 |
| Lack of action at work (art.315) | 34 | 28 | 20 | 19 | 30 | 19 | 17 |
| Negligence (art. 316) | 133 | 183 | 111 | 126 | 215 | 287 | 472 |
| Total number of corruption crimes | 2 483 | 2 467 | 2 090 | 2 145 | 2 087 | 2 411 | 2 127 |
| Total number of crimes | 127, 478 | 121, 667 | 131, 896 | 206, 801 | 287, 681 | 359, 844 | 341, 291 |
| Share of corruption crimes in total number | 1,95 | 2,03 | 1,58 | 1,04 | 0,73 | 0,67 | 0,62 |
According to the Committee on Legal Statistics and Special Records of the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Kazakhstan
The situation with crimes, whose criminal cases were directed to court, is a little different. There is a decrease of almost 1.5 times. Their relative proportion is in the range of 2-2.5%. The relative proportions of each type of crime are also changing – for example, most cases of negligence do not reach court.
Table 4. The number of crimes, whose criminal cases have been sent to court during the reporting period
| 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | |
| Abuse of power (art.307) | 397 | 443 | 424 | 340 | 197 | 402 | 293 |
| Exceeding authority and official powers (art. 308) | 373 | 116 | 100 | 183 | 63 | 99 | 61 |
| Appropriation of power authorization (art.309) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Illegal participation in entrepreneurial activity (art.310) | 5 | 7 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 7 | 8 |
| Impeding lawful entrepreneurial activity (art.310-1) | 0 | 2 | 2 | 5 | |||
| Taking bribe (art.311) | 254 | 315 | 348 | 392 | 344 | 324 | 277 |
| Giving bribe (art. 312) | 207 | 241 | 260 | 123 | 72 | 148 | 171 |
| Mediation at bribery (art. 313) | 9 | 22 | 12 | 21 | 11 | 39 | 14 |
| Forgery (art. 314) | 495 | 542 | 575 | 517 | 297 | 567 | 378 |
| Lack of action at work (art.315) | 18 | 15 | 13 | 8 | 4 | 12 | 6 |
| Negligence (art. 316) | 36 | 74 | 48 | 30 | 25 | 29 | 43 |
| Total number of corruption crimes | 1 794 | 1 775 | 1 783 | 1 619 | 1 015 | 1 630 | 1 256 |
| Total number of crimes | 73 351 | 72 299 | 69 700 | 63 893 | 58 607 | 65 318 | 59 632 |
| Share of corruption crimes in total number | 2,45 | 2,46 | 2,56 | 2,53 | 1,73 | 2,50 | 2,11 |
According to the Committee on Legal Statistics and Special Records of the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Kazakhstan
Corrupt officials are a small fraction of the prosecuted offenders – only about 1.4-1.8%, and the average is about 1,5%, which is even lower than the share of corruption crimes. Overall, the number of those convicted of these crimes is slowly declining.
Table 5. The total number of offenders in corruption cases
| Year | People who committed crimes | Total number of prosecuted criminals | Share of corrupt officials, % | ||
| Total | Brought to criminal liability | Released from criminal prosecution | |||
| 2008 | 1132 | 831 | 301 | 58362 | 1.42 |
| 2009 | 1427 | 1092 | 335 | 59226 | 1.84 |
| 2010 | 1262 | 957 | 305 | 56383 | 1.70 |
| 2011 | 1014 | 715 | 299 | 51151 | 1.40 |
| 2012 | 1146 | 510 | 636 | 45731 | 1.12 |
| 2013 | 1188 | 800 | 388 | 50135 | 1.60 |
| 2014 | 1011 | 662 | 349 | 44179 | 1.50 |
| Total | 8180 | 5567 | 2613 | 365167 | 1.52 |
According to the Committee on Legal Statistics and Special Accounts of the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Kazakhstan
Basically, the number of convicted persons has decreased due to the reducing number of those convicted of bribery, for abuse of office and forgery.
Table 6. Corrupt officials under articles of the Criminal Code – in 2008 and 2014
| Articles of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan | 2008 | 2014 | ||
| Total | Brought to criminal liability | Total | Brought to criminal liability | |
| Abuse of power (art.307) | 279 | 180 | 306 | 186 |
| Exceeding authority and official powers (art. 308) | 111 | 99 | 76 | 70 |
| Appropriation of power authorization (art.309) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Illegal participation in entrepreneurial activity (art.310) | 3 | 2 | 4 | 3 |
| Impeding lawful entrepreneurial activity (art.310-1) | – | – | 1 | 0 |
| Taking bribe (art.311) | 244 | 242 | 250 | 223 |
| Giving bribe (art. 312) | 178 | 157 | 119 | 89 |
| Mediation at bribery (art. 313) | 16 | 12 | 23 | 11 |
| Forgery (art. 314) | 195 | 95 | 140 | 40 |
| Lack of action at work (art.315) | 27 | 11 | 3 | 2 |
| Negligence (art. 316) | 79 | 33 | 89 | 38 |
| Total | 1132 | 831 | 1011 | 662 |
* – This article appeared in 2011
According to the Committee on Legal Statistics and Special Records of the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Kazakhstan
As for the age, corrupt officials are distributed fairly evenly – 95% fit in the range of 21 to 59 years old. Ranges of 30-39 and 40-49 years old are more prevalent, i.e middle-aged and who now constitute the majority of workers.
Table 7. The age structure of corrupt criminals (2008-2014).
| 18-20 years old | 21-29 years old | 30-39 years old | 40-49 years old | 50-59 years old | 60 years old and older | |
| 2008 | 10 | 262 | 257 | 325 | 239 | 39 |
| 2009 | 5 | 296 | 334 | 452 | 295 | 45 |
| 2010 | 1 | 265 | 311 | 373 | 254 | 58 |
| 2011 | 2 | 201 | 269 | 252 | 235 | 55 |
| 2012 | 4 | 232 | 307 | 276 | 255 | 72 |
| 2013 | 2 | 236 | 363 | 281 | 261 | 45 |
| 2014 | 3 | 267 | 275 | 221 | 193 | 52 |
| Total | 27 | 1759 | 2116 | 2180 | 1732 | 366 |
| Share, % | 0.33 | 21.50 | 25.87 | 26.65 | 21.17 | 4.47 |
According to the Committee on Legal Statistics and Special Records of the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Kazakhstan
For obvious reasons, as government employees and officials have an opportunity to commit corrupt acts, they make up about 86% of the total number of persons convicted for corruption crimes. At the same time, private entrepreneurs, who are usually potential bribers, are no more than 5%.
Table 8. Occupation of the corrupt
| Workers | Public employees | Appointed officials | Private entrepreneurs | Lawyers and notaries | The Unemployed | The military | |
| 2008 | 32 | 699 | 112 | 33 | 3 | 68 | 5 |
| 2009 | 34 | 850 | 118 | 53 | 3 | 95 | 1 |
| 2010 | 18 | 710 | 92 | 39 | 3 | 73 | 6 |
| 2011 | 5 | 596 | 81 | 32 | 4 | 37 | 3 |
| 2012 | 4 | 673 | 73 | 36 | 4 | 26 | 8 |
| 2013 | 6 | 721 | 48 | 55 | 3 | 49 | 2 |
| 2014 | 4 | 544 | 30 | 44 | 5 | 50 | 1 |
| Total | 103 | 4793 | 554 | 292 | 25 | 398 | 26 |
| Share, % | 1.66 | 77.37 | 8.94 | 4.71 | 0.40 | 6.42 | 0.42 |
According to the Committee on Legal Statistics and Special Records of the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Kazakhstan
Corrupt official in Kazakhstan is a man of about 40 years old, who worked in the public service and was convicted of abuse of power, as he received a bribe for that.
The most high-profile corruption cases
Let’s consider the following question – the fight against corruption affects all sectors of Kazakhstan’s state apparatus, or are there the untouchable? It is possible to understand looking at the various scandals that have occurred with high-ranking officials.
Over the past 5 to 6 years, there was a lot of corruption scandals in Kazakhstan – I will list the most famous of them [6] [7] [8]:
- Minister of Environmental Protection Nurlan Iskakov – 2009, damage estimated at 1.1 billion tenge, sentenced to 4 years of imprisonment. His deputies were also sentenced
- Chairman of the Agency for Statistics Anar Meshimbayeva – 2009, damage estimated at 700 million tenge, the punishment was seven years in prison with confiscation of property. Her deputies Nurman Bayanov and Birlik Mendybayev were also convicted.
- Deputy Defense Minister, Lieutenant-General Kazhimurat Mayermanov – 2009-2010, 12 billion tenge of damage, sentenced to 11 years in prison.
- Health Minister Zhaksylyk Doskaliyev – 2010-2011, was sentenced to 7 years in prison
- “Horgoss” case” (a group of 45 people) – 2011, the damage of 1.5 billion tenge, were sentenced to terms ranging from 5 to 17 years in prison.
- Akim of Atyrau oblast Bergey Ryskaliyev – 2008-2013, Damage of 71 billion tenge, now – on the wanted list, escaped. 15 accomplices were sentenced to imprisonment
- Akim of Pavlodar region Yerlan Aryn – 2013, damage of 1.6 million tenge, was sentenced to 3 years of probation.
- Chairman of the Agency of Land Resources Umarzak Uzbekov – 2013, damage of one billion tenge, was sentenced to 10 years in prison.
- Director of Borders Service, CNS RK Lt. Gen. Nurlan Dzhulamanov – 2013-2014, a bribe of 56 million tenge, was sentenced to 11 years imprisonment with confiscation of property
- Chairman of the Agency for Regulation of Natural Monopolies Murat Ospanov – 2014, a bribe of 55 million tenge, was sentenced to a fine of 30 times the amount of bribes
- Vice-Minister of Defence, Major General Bagdat Maikeev – 2014, bribe of 372 million tenge, was sentenced to 6 years in prison with confiscation of property
- Vice-Minister of Education Sayat Shayakhmetov – 2013, alleged damage of 1.1 billion tenge, Today the case is directed for additional investigation.
- Defense Minister, former Prime Minister Serik Akhmetov – 2014-2015, the estimated damage of 3.2 billion tenge, the investigation is going on now. Former Governor of Karaganda region Baurzhan Abdishev and of Karaganda Meyram Smagulov are also under investigation.
As seen from the above cases, officials even at the highest level, are arrested and convicted of corruption, including Ministers and regional governors and prominent security officials. Even a former prime minister may be convicted, if proven guilty.
On the other hand, it is obvious that corruption among them happens constantly, despite struggling with it, and long prison terms do not stop political civil servants. Well, it may be noted that the prosecution of corruption offenses are among the most common ways of settling scores between political opponents.
Forms of corruption in Kazakhstan and their current status
Below are the main types of corruption in Kazakhstan and their dynamics.
Forms of corruption in Kazakhstan
| Initiator of corrupt actions | Forms of corruption (basic) | Current state |
| Private business | Various types of withdrawal of money of the shareholders or owners of the company | It will grow due to decreasing level of life standard |
| Use of monopoly to get superprofit | Remains the same | |
| Issuance for a fee of approvals, examinations and certificates, which are issued with violations | It will grow due to the delegation of functions from the state | |
| Law enforcement bodies | Extortion of bribes to hide a variety of violations of the law | Remains the same |
| State apparatus – the lowest layer | Accepting bribes from the population for the distribution of various social benefits | Decreasing due to automation of public services |
| Extortion of bribes to hide a variety of violations of the law committed by a company or a citizen | Decreasing due to improvement in legislation and various legalizations of property | |
| State apparatus – middle layer | Budget allocation under the public procurement and receipt of bribes thanks to it | Decreased a little due to Electronic system of procurement |
| Taking bribes for faster implementation of various state procedures | Slightly decreased due to improving legislation and the system of “electronic government” | |
| Extortion of bribes to cover a variety of violations of the law committed by one or another company | Remains the same | |
| Accepting bribes from the population for the distribution of various social benefits (share with low-level bureaucrats) | Remains the same | |
| State apparatus – the highest layer | Budget allocation under the public procurement | Slightly reduced due to electronic procurement system |
| Getting benefits in the form of grants, low interest loans or other forms of support for businesses | Depends on the number of business support programs. In general, it remains at the same level | |
| Direction of cash flows in the form of deposits or buying bonds into financial institutions | There is not only the use of deposits of government agencies, but also of means of state pension funds and the National Fund for Support of Companies |
Conclusion
In general, the following conclusions can be made:
1) In the media and information space, corruption ranks among the most important problems of Kazakhstan. In reality, however, it is not the main problem that worries the population and business. It becomes a problem only when it becomes the cause of the low efficiency of state administration or apparent violation of the law by law enforcement agencies and by the judiciary. The fact of corruption is softened in some cases, when it helps the population to improve their standard of living or to avoid penalties for breaking the law, and also the fact that thanks to patron-client relations in the current clan-based social class system of the country, they receive a share of corrupt rents.
2) The attitude of the political elites of the country, which is the highest layer of the state apparatus, to corruption is clearly different from the attitude toward it of the middle and lower layers of the state apparatus. The reason is that the elites for the most part have, to a greater or lesser extent, their own business assets and have an opportunity not to take bribes directly from the public and business, as the rest of the state apparatus do. In addition, it is interested in social stability. Therefore, it fight against corruption, which affects the population and part of the business. At the same time, they are often even legally or through relatives own fairly large business assets, and they do not intend to fight with them.
3) Often, the fight against corruption is a disguise of the political struggle, but it should be noted that over the past few years, overt corruption offenses became an occasion to convict even high-ranking officials. Gradually, the rule on the inadmissibility of at least overt corruption actions is implemented in life.
4) There is an improvement of the work of the state apparatus thanks to the “electronic government”, public service centers, activities of the National Chamber of entrepreneurs, business service centers, which reduces the need for corruption due to the reduction of the human factor and improving practices. In general, a dramatic improvement in the quality of governance has come when the system of public service standards was introduced, allowing to clearly assess and monitor the work of state bodies.
5) On the other hand, within the fight against corruption, the public procurement procedure has become so complicated that it reduces the efficiency of the state apparatus even stronger than the corruption itself – by reducing the terms of work, the dumping of certain suppliers and reducing the quality of work and services.
6) In general, corruption has become one of the regular and inevitable things in the political and economic system of the country, however, it is modified by reducing its “bottom” part among the population and maintaining or even increasing the “top” part among the country’s political elites.
Marat Shibutov, representative of the Association of cross-border cooperation in Kazakhstan
The views of the author do not necessarily represent those of CABAR
[1] The report of form №1-OL “On consideration of appeals made by physical and legal persons” for 12 months of 2014. The Committee on Legal Statistics and Special Records of the General Prosecutor of Kazakhstan.
[2] The Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of July 16, 1997 N 167. // http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/K970000167_#z331
[3] The Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan as of July 3, 2014 № 226-V SAM // http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/K1400000226#z1348
[4] Resolution of the Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan for Civil Service Affairs and Anti-Corruption. Approved by the Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan of August 29, 2014 № 900 // http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/U1400000900
[5] On measures to further optimize the system of state bodies of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan of January 22, 1999 N 29. Appendix 1. The staffing of individual state bodies of the Republic of Kazakhstan, maintained at the expense of the republican budget // http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/U990000029_#z13
[6] B. Kadyrbaev 10 most high-profile corruption cases in Kazakhstan in recent years. “Time”. 04/06/2015. // http://www.time.kz/articles/Infografika/2015/06/04/10-samih-gromkih-korrupcionnih-del-v-kazahstane-za-poslednie-godi
[7] M. Bocharova. Unequal battle: 8 high-profile corruption scandals in Kazakhstan. Vlast. 20/11/2014. // Http://vlast.kz/politika/neravnyj_boj_8_gromkih_korrupcionnyh_skandalov_v_kazahstane-8464.html
[8] B. Abramov 12 corruption cases: who in Kazakhstan was jailed for corruption. Vlast. 05/20/2013. // Http://vlast.kz/politika/12_korrupcionnyh_del_kogo_v_kazahstane_sazhali_za_korrupciju-1812.html