ISSUES OF APPLYING FOREIGN EXPERIENCE IN COMBATING CORRUPTION TO THE NATIONAL LEGAL SYSTEM

The article discusses the ongoing reforms in combating corruption in Uzbekistan and the application of foreign experience positive aspects to national legislation. In this regard, the experience of developed and developing countries such as the United Kingdom, Germany, Austria, China and Kazakhstan was studied. In addition, the article gives several recommendations for improving national legislation.

VOLUME 2 ISSUE №2 E-ISSN: 2181-1024 O CTO Volume BER 2, Issue 2021 2 (2021) TSUL Legal Report 1

12.00.02 – CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW. FINANCE AND CUSTOMS LAW

Khakimov Rahim Rasuljonovich – First Deputy Minister of Higher and Secondary Special Education, Doctor of Law, Professor

Salaev Nodirbek Saparbayevich – Deputy Rector on Scientific Work and Innovation of Tashkent State University of Law, Doctor of Law, Professor

Rustambekov Islambek Rustambekovich – Deputy Rector on Academic Affairs of Tashkent State University of Law, Doctor of Law, Professor

Nematov Jasur Aminjonovich – Professor of the Tashkent branch of the Russian University of Economics named after GV Plekhanov

Latipov Samir Ildusovich – Director of the Center for Legal Initiatives and Innovations of the Tashkent State University of Law

Kurbanov Maruf Mamadaminovich – Head of Criminalists and Forensic Examination Department of Tashkent State University of Law, Doctor of Philosophy in Law

Narziev Otabek Sadiyevich – Head of International Private Law Department of Tashkent State University of Law, Doctor of Philosophy in Law

Khodzhaev Shakhzhakhon Akmalzhon ugli – Head of Intellectual Property Department of Tashkent State University of Law, Doctor of Philosophy in Law

Uzakova Gozal Sharipovna – Head of Environmental Law Department of Tashkent State University of Law, Doctor of Philosophy in Law

Musaev Bekzod Tursunboyevich – Head of the Constitutional Law Department of Tashkent State University of Law, Doctor of Philosophy in Law

Gafurova Nozimakhon Eldarovna – Head of the Department of International Law and Human Rights of the Tashkent State University of Law, Doctor of Law

Nematov Jurabek Nematulloyevich – Associate Professor of Administrative and Financial Law Department of Tashkent State University of Law, Doctor of Law

Yakubova Iroda Baxramovna – Associate Professor of Intellectual Property Department of Tashkent State University of Law, Doctor of Philosophy in Law

Abzalova Khurshida Mirziyatovna – Associate Professor of Department of Criminal Law, Criminology and Anti-corruption, Doctor of Law

E-ISSN: 2181-1024 Volume 2, Issue 2 (2021) TSUL Legal Report 3

Akhmedova Guzalkhon Utkurovna – Associate Professor of Criminalistics and Forensic Examination Department of Tashkent State University of Law, Doctor of Law

Abulkosimova Saodatkhon Khasan kizi – Editor of “TSUL Legal Report” international electronic scientific journal of Tashkent State University, Master of Arts degree in Editing and Publishing specialty

Contacts Editorial office address: Tashkent, st. Sayilgoh, 35. Index 100047. Principal Contact Tel.: ([phone number hidden] Fax: ([phone number hidden] E-mail: info@legalreport.tsul.uz

© 2020. TSUL – Tashkent State University of Law. All rights reserved.

4 TSUL Legal Report Volume 2, Issue 2 (2021) E-ISSN: 2181-1024

12.00.02 – CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW. FINANCE AND CUSTOMS LAW

ABZALOVA XURSHIDA, RUZIYEV BEKHRUZ, GAFUROV ULUGBEK Anti-corruption is the demand of the present time! . .............................................................6

KHOJIYEVA RUZIGUL Issues of applying foreign experience in combating corruption to the national legal system ..........................................................................................................11

12.00.03 – CIVIL LAW. EMPLOYING LAW. FAMILY RIGHT. INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LAW

BAKHRAMOVA MOKHINUR Jurisdictional decisions and consequences of their adoption: best practices and case analyses ..................................................................................... 16

BOBONAZAROV ALISHER Issues of privileges and immunities of international organizations and their officials in international law . ...................................................................................... 29

MAMASOLIYEVA SHAKHRIZODA Introduction of a new mechanism in creating a favorable investment climate: problems and solutions ..................................................................................................... 34

12.00.08 – CRIMINAL LAW. CRIMINOLOGY. CRIMINAL-EXECUTIVE LAW

ABULKOSIMOVA SAODATKHON The portrayal of the serial killer in in the true crime drama “The Serpent” and the problems of sympathy for serial murderers in television series . .......................... 43

E-ISSN: 2181-1024 Volume 2, Issue 2 (2021) TSUL Legal Report 5

12.00.02 – CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW. FINANCE AND CUSTOMS LAW

ISSUES OF APPLYING FOREIGN EXPERIENCE IN COMBATING CORRUPTION TO THE NATIONAL LEGAL SYSTEM

UDC: 343.37(042)(575.1) ORCID: 0000-0002-2013-3754

Khojiyeva Ruzigul Employee of the Center for Advanced Training of Lawyers under the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Uzbekistan e-mail: kxojiyeva@bk.ru

Keywords: corruption, bribery, The article discusses the ongoing reforms civil servant, e-government, in combating corruption in Uzbekistan and the business corruption, special application of foreign experience positive aspects prosecutor’s office. to national legislation. In this regard, the experience of developed and developing countries such as the United Kingdom, Germany, Austria, China and Kazakhstan was studied. In addition, the article gives several recommendations for improving national legislation.

Today in Uzbekistan, a tough and uncompromising fight against corruption is waged, and a number of normative bases are created in this regard. In particular, the Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan of January 3, 2017 No. LRU-419 “On Combating Corruption”, as well as additional measures to improve the anti-corruption system in the Republic of Uzbekistan, Presidential Decree of the Republic of Uzbekistan of May 27, 2019 No. PD-5729 “On measures for further improvement of the anti-corruption system in the Republic of Uzbekistan”, Presidential Decree No. PD-6013 “On additional measures to improve anti-corruption system in the Republic of Uzbekistan”, establishment of the Republican Interdepartmental Commission for Combating Corruption and the Anti-Corruption Agency, and approval of the State Anti-Corruption Program ensured the effective implementation of a number of measures to prevent corruption-related offenses in the country. Moreover, the National Action Strategy on Five Priority Development Areas for 2017‒2021, the second priority of the State Program for 2020 in the Year of Science, Enlightenment and Digital Economy ‒ ensuring the rule of law and further reform of the judicial system, the establishment

E-ISSN: 2181-1024 Volume 2, Issue 2 (2021) TSUL Legal Report 11

12.00.02 – CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW. FINANCE AND CUSTOMS LAW

of a separate state body for combating corruption, provided for in Paragraph 53, are important issues in the Presidential Decree to comprehensively study international experience in defining the legal framework, tasks and functions, rights and obligations of this body and its optimal aspects. At the same time, the President’s Address to the Oliy Majlis this year calls for the development of a number of measures to combat crime, in particular corruption-related crimes: “All government agencies, political parties, public organizations, the media and, in general, every citizen must be mobilized to combat this scourge” [1]. Such reforms are an important tool in removing corruption from society in the near future. Simultaneously, it is useful to study the experience of developed countries in this area and apply it to the national legislative system. The reason is that the anti-corruption mechanism in some countries is at an advanced and effective level due to these reforms. Therefore, these countries are now at the forefront of economic performance. Examples of such countries are the United States, the Federal Republic of Germany, Austria, the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as Asian countries such as China and Japan, and below we will learn in detail about the experience of these countries. Considering the example of the CIS countries, the experience of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the fight against corruption is also unique. The history of the fight against corruption in Kazakhstan can be divided into two main stages, which to some extent characterize the evolution of anti-corruption activities in Kazakhstan. While the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 267-I of July 2, 1998 “On Combating Corruption” was in force in the territory of the country, the first phase covers the period from 1998 to 2015. During this period, special attention was paid to measures to eliminate the conditions under which citizens contribute to the most common internal corruption commission in obtaining public services on the ground.

Most importantly, citizens of Kazakhstan have faced various instances of corruption in accelerating access to public services in educational and medical institutions, as well as in law enforcement agencies, by accepting various certificates. In order to prevent bribery among civil servants and eliminate interpersonal contacts, the country has begun to actively implement the “one-stop shop” principle that any citizen can receive the service he or she needs in a matter of minutes. At the end of time and other types of public services (obtaining a certificate of address, ID card and passport, business registration, etc.) they were translated into online format under the “e-government” program. With the start of the second phase (this phase covers the period from 2015 to the present), the basic principles and methods of combating corruption in Kazakhstan have been revised. The main normative document was the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated July 2, 1998 No. 267-I “On Combating Corruption” [2]. The new law has made it possible to move from a strategy of struggle that inevitably leads to the domination of repressive methods and sanctions to a comprehensive strategy of eliminating the causes and conditions of corruption. The main object of the confrontation remains internal corruption among the population. However, at the same time in Kazakhstan the fight against business corruption has begun: corruption, bribery and the fact of kickbacks by officials during public procurement. During the contract period, special attention was paid to the public sector, whose cash turnover was estimated at billions of US dollars. In addition, Article 6 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Combating Corruption” stipulates that measures to prevent corruption are divided into several areas. If one looks at the Western experience in this regard, especially in the United States, the anti-corruption system relies on strong mechanisms. In particular, the system of Compliance Control introduced in our country in recent years was first

12 TSUL Legal Report Volume 2, Issue 2 (2021) E-ISSN: 2181-1024

12.00.02 – CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW. FINANCE AND CUSTOMS LAW

established in 1906 in the United States with the establishment of a federal service called “FOOD AND DRUG ADMINSTRATION”, which supervised the activities of food and pharmaceutical companies as a result of economic development and the development of international relations [3].

The US experience in combating corruption is diverse and extensive. The United States Federal Witness Protection Program (WPP) is one of them, and the United States is the first country in the world to have a federal law containing witness protection standards. This is the Organized Crime Control, enacted in 1970. Many states in this country have their own Witness Protection Programs, which typically provide less protection than a federal program. In 1982, the US Congress adopted the Victim and Witness Protection Act. Under the law, one of the important aspects of witness protection is the launch of a special telephone network for crime victims in New York so that by calling it, they can find out where the assailants are serving their sentences and when their release dates. This hotline can also be used by lawyers and witnesses involved in court proceedings. Any caller of this telephone notification service can register a special password, after which the computer system will contact victims by phone in 10 minutes after criminals’ release from prison. If victims do not answer the phones, the computer calls them every half hour for twenty-four hours. If the witness or victim is in real danger, protective measures are applied, including relocation, a change of workplace, and even a change in appearance.

The federal Witness Security Program (WITSEC) is currently being implemented by the U.S. Special Marshals Service, which has its headquarters, regional offices, and a police office with a witness protection inspector in each city. A similar section is also an integral part of the FBR. In each individual case, the final decision on whether a citizen should participate in a Witness Protection Program is made by the U.S. Secretary of Justice (DOJ) based on the recommendations and requests of state attorneys. Once the candidate is approved, Marshalls Service representatives enter into a contract with the witness and commence his or her defense. An average of $40,000 is allocated for each protected person, which is spent on personal protection, change of residence, change of living conditions, and cash allowances for the adjustment period, which for most protected persons is about a year and a half [4].

It should be noted that in the United States, the right of a civil servant to receive additional income is also partially limited, and the amount of such income should not exceed 15 percent of the basic salary [5].

When studying the UK anti-corruption strategy, it can be said that the country is pursuing a new anti-corruption strategy for 2017‒2022. This strategy was announced in December 2017 and was based on the “Anti-Corruption Action Plan” adopted in the country in 2014 for the first time in British history. This strategy, which encompasses the activities of all government agencies and sets a long-term goal for an effective fight against corruption, is masked by the government’s roadmap for preventing corruption.

The plan identifies six priorities in the fight against corruption:

1) reducing intra-system corruption in high-risk sectors of the economy, such as borders and ports; 2) strengthening the UK’s reputation as an international financial center; 3) widespread promotion of professional ethics in the public and private sectors; 4) reduction of corruption in the pro­ curement of goods, works and services for public needs and the distribution of grants; 5) creating a world-class business environment; 6) cooperation with other states in the fight against corruption, and so on [6].

In our opinion, based on the policy of the Republic of Uzbekistan, special priorities should be identified in the fight against corruption in the country and measures to be taken in accordance with them.

E-ISSN: 2181-1024 Volume 2, Issue 2 (2021) TSUL Legal Report 13

12.00.02 – CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW. FINANCE AND CUSTOMS LAW

Furthermore, Germany and Austria also have strong state programs to eradicate corruption, and the role of local units in the effective functioning of the anti-corruption body is important. In particular, the experience of Germany and Austria shows that local structures play an important role in the fight against corruption. The main link in the anti-corruption system in the German state apparatus is the special anti-corruption units in federal and land ministries and departments.

In Austria, a special prosecutor’s office deals with the fight against corruption. It is headquartered in Vienna and has branches in all major cities in Austria.

At the same time, Austria has a threewek training course organized twice a year by the Federal Bureau of Anti-Corruption to prevent corruption in all areas, especially in the education system [7].

In Asian countries, as well as in Europe, the fight against corruption is a topical issue, and a system of ruthless fight against corruption has been established in public policy. If we consider the experience of Japan, in the 90s of the last century, Japanese researchers worked to reduce corruption: information disclosure on the activities of government agencies, the introduction of an independent ombudsman at the central and local levels to control officials, the imposition of severe penalties for such crimes, deprivation of elections, loss of lifelong promotion, punishment of related persons in the electoral group, the financing of election campaigns at the expense of full state funds. In Japan, in addition to fighting corruption, for defamation (libel or slander) on bribery can also result in imprisonment for up to three years or a fine. Penalties for a number of official crimes have been increased through reforms in criminal law. For example, abuse of power by government and public officials is punishable by up to 2 years in prison. Previously, a person could face up to six months in prison for such a crime.

Similarly, there is an uncompromising fight against corruption in China, including the fact that Chinese police officers are not allowed to carry cash. They buy food and necessities through special coupons. If an employee is found to have cash, he or she will be dismissed immediately.

At the same time, countries such as Latvia, Lithuania and Ukraine have specific mechanisms in the fight against corruption, in particular, the Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau of the Republic of Latvia (the Bureau). This includes strict adherence to the law by lawmakers in the fight against corruption, as well as a very effective mechanism of parliamentary control over the activities of the Bureau. It also uses the well-known practice of parliamentary inquiries, the invitation of the above-mentioned heads of law enforcement agencies to special parliamentary committees, the establishment of special commissions, and others.

Based on the above analysis, we can conclude that it is expedient to apply the experience of our countries in the uncompromising fight against corruption in our national legislation. In particular: a) the competence of the specialized anti-corruption body; b) the rules of government; c) the appointment and dismissal of the head of the institution; d) dismissal procedure; e) internal organizational structure (tasks, jurisdiction, rights and obligations, budget, rules of staffing); f) interaction with other institutions, in particular, law enforcement and regulatory agencies, as well as the establishment of a special prosecutor’s office to investigate corruption crimes, based on the Austrian experience, which will allow to identify these ongoing crimes and investigate them clearly and in a short time.

In addition, the establishment of a successful system of combating corruption requires the establishment of large-scale international cooperation in this area and the study of best practices of foreign countries and their application in national legislation and practice with a critical approach.

14 TSUL Legal Report Volume 2, Issue 2 (2021) E-ISSN: 2181-1024

12.00.02 – CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW. FINANCE AND CUSTOMS LAW