Map of the Contact Line
Map of the contact line as of October 2017 which displays key settlements near the contact line, roads and railways, checkpoints as well as humanitarian-logistic centers.
Stakeholders in the defence and security sector of Ukraine
Anti-corruption system of Ukraine
Government Defence Anti-Corruption Index
The Government Defence Anti-Corruption Index (GI) assesses the existence, effectiveness and enforcement of institutional and informal controls to manage the risk of corruption in defence and security institutions.
Corruption risks in fastest growing militaries threaten global stability
Transparency International warns that defence governance in G20 lags behind economic cooperation
Over half of G20 countries lack adequate checks and balances over their military forces, posing a threat to international stability, according to a new Government Defence Index (GI) from Transparency International.
Eight of the G20 states assessed in the index received either D or E grade, representing either a “high” or “very high” risk of defence corruption. But global military expenditure is rising fastest in exactly those places where public oversight over the military is weakest. China, Saudi Arabia, and Brazil ranked bottom of the G20, but in the last decade they increased defence spending by 441%%, 286%, and 225% respectively.
Katherine Dixon, Director of Transparency International’s Defence and Security Programme, said:
“The actions of the G20 have a disproportionate impact on global security. Together they are responsible for the vast majority of global defence spending as well as the generation and trade of much of the globe’s most devastating weaponry. Their role in international interventions has a direct impact on the lives of millions of people across the globe.”
Notes to editors: The Government Defence Anti-Corruption Index (GI) assesses the existence and effectiveness of institutional and informal controls to manage the risk of corruption in defence and security institutions and of their enforcement. Transparency International’s team of experts draws together evidence from a wide variety of sources and interviewees across 77 indicators to provide the government with a detailed assessment of the integrity of their defence institutions.
Corruption Perceptions Index-2016
Impunity and Inefficient Justice System Keep Ukraine at the Bottom of Corruption Rankings
Ukraine scored 29 points out of 100 possible in the world Corruption Perceptions Index (СРІ) for 2016, which is an improvement of two points compared to last year. However, this meager progress is not enough for the country, the authorities of which called fighting against corruption the main priority. The progress of the anti–corruption reform resulted in an improved position in the world ranking, but the absence of an efficient judicial system and the reality of actual impunity of corrupt officials prevent Ukraine from making a huge leap forward and breaking through the 30-point barrier.
Ukraine is ranked 131 out of 176 countries in the World Ranking of Corruption Perception and shared this result with a rate of 29 points together with Kazakhstan, Russia, Nepal, and Iran.
The World Justice Project Rule of Law Index survey gave Ukraine most of the points, which is taken into account in forming the CPI. The rate of our country increased of ten points in comparison with previous years. This is connected with the reduced abuse of office in the government (the rate has improved by 14%), in police and armed forces (the rate has improved by 6%), but the situation remained the same as under the Yanukovych regime in the judicial branch of power. The World Competitiveness Yearbook survey indicates this very problem that gave Ukraine three additional points.
To have real anti-corruption changes in Ukraine, Тransparency International Ukraine proposes the following five steps:
Corruption and insecurity reinforce one another in conflict environments. Conflict often weakens state institutions and shifts the balance of expectations and incentives, entrenching corruption, undermining the development of state capacity, and encouraging cycles of impunity that leave whole populations angry and disenfranchised. This can be particularly pernicious when it affects defence and security institutions, turning them from protectors into predators that endanger human security, slow down development, and can perpetuate conflict.