Corruption Perceptions Index 2009
South Eastern Europe, Eastern Europe and Central Asia
20 Countries/Territories included: 20
The 2009 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) demonstrates that corruption remains a serious challenge for the entire region. All of the countries included register scores below 5 (out of 10) indicating that they face serious perceived levels of domestic, public-sector corruption.
In South Eastern Europe, the importance of prospective European Union membership cannot be overestimated as the main driver to spur anti-corruption efforts. The freeze in 2008 of considerable amounts of EU funds previously allocated to Bulgaria, due to a lack of progress in anti-corruption and judicial reform, seems to have strengthened the European Commission position in its demands for reform. It is no coincidence that the tone of the EU progress reports on accession candidates issued in October 2009, reflect to a large extent, the 2009 CPI ranking.
Notably, the 2009 CPI scores of Turkeyand Croatia(both EU candidate countries), 4.4 and 4.1respectively, surpassed those of the newest EU members Bulgaria and Romania, both at 3.8 this year.
Various corruption scandals along with the lack of implementation and enforcement of anti-corruption reforms are likely factors in Bosnia and Herzegovina having the lowest score (3.0) in South Eastern Europe.
Many countries from the former Soviet Union show improved CPI scores in 2009. Kazakhstan’s increase from 2.2 in 2008 to 2.7 may be attributed to government anti-corruption efforts aimed at improving conditions for foreign direct investment along with the country’s much-discussed upcoming
chairmanship of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) in 2010. Kazakhstan is the first former Soviet Block country to assume this role and is also considered the strongest economy in the region. Still, Kazakhstan’s low CPI score indicates that corruption remains systemic, with the most problematic areas being the judiciary, police, customs, property rights, land registration and construction projects.
Despite ongoing internal political turmoil, which was exacerbated by the war with Russia in August 2008, Georgia’s CPI score continues to increase, from 3.9 to 4.1. There is a general consensus among Georgians and the international community that petty corruption has been reduced significantly. However, concerns remain regarding high-level corruption and on corrupt practices in the judiciary. The government should focus on promoting greater transparency and public trust in agencies with an anti-corruption role and it should ensure that related reforms are continuously monitored and assessed.
Russia’s slim increase from 2.1 in 2008 to 2.2 in 2009 could be interpreted as a mildly positive response to the newly-adopted package of anti-corruption legislation initiated and promoted by President Medvedev and passed by the Duma in December 2008. The president recently admitted publicly that corruption is endemic in Russia. The excessive role of government in the economy and business sector, which spurs the supply side of corruption, aggravates the problem.
Azerbaijan has improved its score from 1.9 in 2008 to 2.3 in 2009, most likely as a result of the government’s commitment to improve the business environment and increased general awareness about the importance of curbing corruption. In the past five years five TI Advocacy and Legal Advice Centres (ALACs) – offices that help citizens to claim their rights in cases of corruption - opened across the country and the government has entered into an open dialogue with civil society through a network of local anti-corruption NGOs and TI Azerbaijan. These are positive developments, though corruption remains entrenched throughout society. The government should improve law enforcement procedures to ensure that anti-corruption legislation works.
Armenia’s CPI score continues to slide from 2.9 in 2008 to 2.7 this year. The political and economic elite continue to exert control over the judiciary, media, business and other institutions. Continued inconsistency in implementation of anti-corruption legislation, and in meeting international obligations, as well as unwillingness of the authorities to address grand corruption are among the most critical factors that contribute to continued decrease in the country’s score.
Political turmoil in Ukrainecontributed to the fall in its score from 2.5 to 2.2. Political corruption, corruption involving the public and private sectors, along with high tolerance levels among citizens in regards to corrupt practices, provide for a bleak outlook.
