According to the results of an anti-corruption inquiry conducted by Transparency International, Russia has the worst Corruption Perceptions Index among the G-20 states and the BRICS states. The country has taken the 133rd place from 174 positions in the index, however, going ten positions up against the previous year. The experts named such ratings conventional.
According to an annual report of Transparency International, the Corruption Perceptions Index in Russia has made 28 points in 2012 (the best result is 100 points, the worst result is no points at all), the Novye Izvestia daily reported. According to this indicator, the country occupied the 133rd place from 174 places in the index that is the lowest result among the G-20 states. Russia is lagging far behind the G-8 states. Italy, which is the second country from the bottom among the G-8 states, has 42 points and holds the 72nd place. All BRICS states outstripped Russia: Brazil holds the 69th place and 43 points, China holds the 80th place and 39 points, India has the 94th place and 36 points. A high-profile corruption scandal in Oboronservis did not affect Russia’s position, as a bulk of statistical data was gathered before it, the newspaper noted.
Still Russia has the same position as such countries as Kazakhstan, Iran, Honduras and Guyana, the Moskovsky Komsomolets daily reported. “We hope that you will succeed to get out from the zone of national shame in the lower part of the rating,” Director of the Russian branch of Transparency International Yelena Panfilova said. “It is senseless to speak about some improvements. This is worse or more than worse,” she said.
The expert is quite cautious about the prospect for considerable improvement of the corruption situation in Russia. She chooses the golden mean among the opinions of those, who take the latest events just as the disputes between “the clans of influence”, and those who believe that the struggle against corruption ceased to be waged only in words. Meanwhile, the question remains unsettled, why the state authorities brought to justice “concrete officials” instead of investigating how this could have happened at all.
Such ratings are conventional and are frequently based on biased approaches, Deputy Director of the Institute of Asian and African Studies of the Moscow State University Prof. Leonid Geveling, who wrote the book “Kleptocracy”, said. This is explained by the fact that it is very difficult to “calculate” the corruption: the statistical data is usually concealed, the process is usually latent and what we see is actually “the top of the iceberg.” It happens that journalists and even some scientists find such ratings as the final truth. This is wrong. The rating should be taken as a guideline.
What is the reason for inaccurate ratings? “First, they have some lag in time and give a picture, which took place less than a year ago. Secondly, the corruption, particularly a low-scale corruption, is accompanied with the cultural tradition of gifts, and these two phenomena can hardly be taken separately. Thirdly, it is important to consider the sources of information,” Geveling said. “Say, the law enforcement agencies, the statistical reports of which are used in the making of the ratings, are inclined to exaggerate the role of corruption and crime in general in the approval of the budget in order to get a big chunk of the budget cake. On the contrary, the negative data is usually concealed during the elections. Or this is the information of the journalists. The press frequently takes advantage of hot news reports, which can increase their number of copies, meanwhile, this is linked with the parties, sponsors and investors. One more source is sociological surveys among people, including tourists and businesspeople, who visited the country.