Abstract:

The article outlines the problems of corruption and bribery in public authorities in Ukraine. The destructive influence of corruption provokes and deepens the social crisis, undermines the image of the Civil Service of Ukraine, and holds back the socio-economic development of the country. Currently, corruption in Ukraine is called one of the most significant threats to national security. The aim of this article is to substantiate main directions and means of confronting corruption and bribery in the system of state authorities in Ukraine. The object of the research is the social relations that arise in the process of counteracting corruption and bribery. The methodology of the research is based on the fundamental provisions of the public administration theory, as well as on the concepts developed both by the Ukrainian and foreign researchers and practitioners aimed at preventing and counteracting corruption. Main theoretical provisions and conclusions of the article highlight effective measures of preventing and counteracting corruption in state authorities in Ukraine. The results of the research can be useful for the public administration bodies when developing and implementing anti-corruption programs or laws and regulations on the issues of forming an anticorruption consciousness of citizens and state authority officials. Value/originality. The article outlines the economic-mathematical model of “bribe maximization”, which takes into account the limitations of the possibility of offering and agreeing to receive a bribe. The model is the basis, which proves that the most effective way of fighting corruption is streamlining the efforts of the authorities on creating a competitive environment: “economic benefit – the risk of punishment”. These conditions decrease the officials’ interest to receive bribes since their size ceases to compensate for the risk of disclosure, detention, and punishment. Meanwhile, the series of other practices are also important, namely: building a holistic legal system based on integrity; introduction of mechanisms of accountability and responsibility of officials; cooperation with civil society and the private sector; adaptation of international experience to national realities; identification of “high risk zones” for diverting there main efforts and resources.

Keywords: