Russia mulls sending cosmonauts to China’s planned orbit stationScience & Space September 25, 12:22
Venezuelan president to take part in Russian Energy WeekBusiness & Economy September 25, 12:12
Russia’s Admiral Grigorovich frigate sails to Mediterranean SeaMilitary & Defense September 25, 11:36
Russian lawmaker calls German election outcome ‘predictable’Russian Politics & Diplomacy September 25, 10:46
Russian-Chinese naval drills ‘Joint Sea 2017’ completed in VladivostokMilitary & Defense September 25, 10:29
Independence referendum underway in Iraqi KurdistanWorld September 25, 9:47
Russia and US have no plans to curtail space cooperationScience & Space September 25, 9:30
Denis Matsuev: That extraordinary idea workedSociety & Culture September 25, 8:00
Tehran's top diplomat slams 'fake' empathy from Trump for IraniansWorld September 25, 6:06
MOSCOW, April 10 (Itar-Tass) - Corruption is the most profitable business in Russia, and gains from corruption-related business amount to about 300 billion dollars, says a report by the head of the National Anticorruption Committee (NAC), Kirill Kabanov.
“When corruption was only at the top, the system remained manageable. But now it has hit the middle and lowest levels, and this leads to a social tension,” Kabanov said at a news conference on Wednesday presenting his report.
Kabanov, who is also member of the presidential Human Rights Council, regretted a low activity of the citizens in fight against the corruption, saying that the demand in this sphere is formed by the government and not by themselves.
According to Kabanov, experts of the NAC and the Human Rights Council, offer a set of measures to step up fight against corruption.
This involves, in particular, a need to ratify international documents on control over incomes and expenses of state officials, giving a possibility of “a criminal investigation in case of imbalance”. Besides, the expert believes it is necessary to commit ministries and department to react to media reports and check their information about corruption of officials.
He also believes it is necessary to more thoroughly outline office duties and responsibility of state and municipal servants for decision making in the sphere of budget spending.