Keywords
position assessment
public service
NACP
NATO Building Integrity Programme
GRECO
OECD
functional analysis
How to Cite
Abstract
The assessment of positions with elevated corruption risks is a central instrument of preventive anti-corruption policy: it enables the concentration of administrative resources on functionally vulnerable positions without relying on subjective reputational judgments. For Ukraine, which is pursuing Euro-Atlantic integration under conditions of armed aggression, this issue carries dual strategic significance, as the quality of anti-corruption mechanisms directly affects both the effective use of defense resources and the fulfilment of EU and NATO membership conditions. The purpose of the article is a comparative legal analysis of the methodologies for assessing corruption-vulnerable positions in Ukraine and NATO member states in order to identify systemic patterns and formulate evidence-based recommendations. Results. Five systemic patterns of effective assessment models were identified: the primacy of the functional approach over the personal (corruption risk is a property of the position, not the person); differentiation of legal consequences according to the functional risk profile; digitalization and automated monitoring of behavioral risk indicators; external independent verification as a mandatory condition for overcoming formalism; and dynamic updating of registers based on normatively established review cycles. Three key systemic deficiencies of Ukrainian practice were established: the prevalence of a structural-functional approach without adequate consideration of the personal integrity dimension; persistent formalism in the reporting of authorized anti-corruption units; and the existence of monitoring blind spots due to the absence of automated inter-registry interaction. To improve the national model, the article proposes to legislatively consolidate the principle of functional priority, introduce a three-tier differentiation of legal consequences, establish a mandatory biennial review cycle, ensure technological modernization through inter-registry integration, and institutionally entrench a preventive audit mechanism led by the NACP.
References
1. Building Integrity UK. (2016). Programme overview and training materials. UK Defence Academy. https://www.da.mod.uk/study-with-us/colleges-and-schools/building-integrity-uk
2. Busol, O. (2014). Countermeasures against corruption crime in terms globalization. State and Law, (65), 240-248. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/dip_2014_65_37
3. Council of Europe. (1997). Twenty guiding principles for the fight against corruption (Resolution (97) 24). Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/16806cc17c
4. Council of Europe / GRECO. (2017). Fourth evaluation round – corruption prevention in respect of members of parliament, judges and prosecutors: Evaluation report Ukraine. https://rm.coe.int/fourth-evaluation-round-corruption-prevention-in-respect-of-members-of/16807bfbc1
5. Council of Europe / GRECO. (2022). Fifth evaluation round – preventing corruption and promoting integrity in central governments and law enforcement agencies: Evaluation report Ukraine. https://rm.coe.int/fifth-evaluation-round-preventing-corruption-and-promoting-integrity-in/1680a84d9d
6. Council of Europe / GRECO. (2023). Evaluation procedures and methodology: Frequently asked questions. https://www.coe.int/en/web/greco/faq
7. Derzhavne pidpryiemstvo “UkrNDNTs”. (2018). ISO 31000:2018. Risk management – Principles and guidelines. Budstandart. https://online.budstandart.com/ua/catalog/doc-page.html?id_doc=80322
8. Derzhavne pidpryiemstvo “UkrNDNTs”. (2014). IEC/ISO 31010:2013. Risk management – Risk assessment techniques. Budstandart. https://online.budstandart.com/ua/catalog/doc-page.html?id_doc=66723
9. Estonian Internal Security Service. (2023). Annual review 2023: Corruption and economic crime. https://kapo.ee/en/content/annual-reviews/
10. Kalynivska, Yu. V. (2023). Administratyvno-pravovi zasady identyfikatsii ta klasyfikatsii koruptsiino vrazlyvykh posad u systemi orhaniv publichnoi vlady [Administrative-legal foundations of identifying and classifying corruption-vulnerable positions in the public authority system] (Doctoral dissertation) Kyiv.
11. Kliui, D. V. (2022). Upravlinnia koruptsiinymy ryzykamy v orhanakh publichnoi vlady [Managing corruption risks in public authorities]. Lira-K.
12. Klitgaard, R. (1988). Controlling corruption. Berkeley: University of California Press.
13. Mosov, S. P., Lutsenko, S. V., & Kirian, T. M. (2020). Koruptsiini ryzyky: identyfikatsiia ta otsinka v systemi publichnoho upravlinnia [Corruption risks: Identification and assessment in the public management system]. FOP Maslakov.
14. Mungiu-Pippidi, A. (2015). The Quest for Good Governance: How Societies Develop Control of Corruption. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316286937
15. National Agency on Corruption Prevention. (2017, January 19). Methodological recommendations on preparation of anti-corruption programmes of public authorities (Decision No. 31). https://nazk.gov.ua/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Metodychni-rekomendatsiyi.pdf
16. National Agency on Corruption Prevention. (2016, December 2). Methodology for assessing corruption risks in the activities of government bodies (Decision No. 126, registered in Ministry of Justice of Ukraine on 28 December 2016, No. 1718/29848). Official website of the Parliament of Ukraine. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z1718-16
17. National Agency on Corruption Prevention. (2021, December 28). Corruption risk management methodology (Order No. 830/21, registered in Ministry of Justice of Ukraine on 17 February 2022, No. 219/37555). Official website of the Parliament of Ukraine. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0219-22
18. National Agency on Corruption Prevention. (2022). Report on the results of corruption risk assessment in the activities of the National Police of Ukraine. https://nazk.gov.ua/uk/kmp/natsionalna-politsiya-ukrayiny/
19. National Agency on Corruption Prevention. (2024a). Four years of NACP 2.0: Strategic analysis of corruption risks (2020–2023). https://nazk.gov.ua/uk/novyny/chotyry-roky-nazk-2-0-strategichnyy-analiz-koruptsiinykh-ryzykiv/
20. National Agency on Corruption Prevention. (2024b). Information system for monitoring the implementation of the state anti-corruption policy. https://ism.nazk.gov.ua
21. NATO. (2010). Building integrity and reducing corruption in defence: A compendium of best practices. North Atlantic Treaty Organization. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_68368.htm
22. Norway Centre for Integrity in the Defence Sector. (2012). Integrity in defence: Principles and practice. Norwegian Ministry of Defence.
23. OECD. (2017a). Preventing policy capture: Integrity in public decision making. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264065239-en
24. OECD. (2017b). Recommendation of the council on public integrity. OECD Legal Instruments. https://www.oecd.org/gov/ethics/recommendation-public-integrity/
25. OECD. (2023). Anti-corruption reforms in Ukraine: Fourth round of monitoring of the Istanbul Anti-Corruption Action Plan. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/corruption/acn/ukraine/
26. Pavlenko, R. M. (2022). Administratyvno-pravovi zasady zapobihannia koruptsii v orhanakh Natsionalnoi politsii Ukrainy [Administrative-legal foundations of anti-corruption prevention in the National Police of Ukraine bodies] (Doctoral dissertation). Kyiv.
27. Pavlenko, R. M. (2023). Specifics of forming lists of positions with elevated corruption risk levels in law enforcement agencies. Scientific Journal of the National Academy of Internal Affairs, (1), 45–54.
28. Rose-Ackerman, S. (1999). Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences, and Reform. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139175098
29. Serdiuk, O. O. (2022). Corruption risks in the field of law enforcement: Specifics and detection methods. Bulletin of the Luhansk Educational and Scientific Institute named after E.O. Didorenko, (2), 216–227.
30. SIPRI. (2018). Policy impact assessment report on the NATO building integrity programme. https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2018-06/sipri_nato_building_integrity.pdf
31. Transparency International Defence & Security. (2020). Government defence integrity index: NATO members & partner states. https://government.defenceindex.org
32. Transparency International Lithuania. (2012). National integrity system assessment: Lithuania. TI Lithuania. https://transparency.lt/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/nis_lithuania_full_report_EN.pdf
33. UNDP Ukraine & Ministry for Communities and Territories Development of Ukraine. (2024). Methodology for Corruption Risks Assessment in the Activities of Local Self-Government Bodies. UNDP. https://www.undp.org/uk/ukraine/publications/metodolohiya-otsinky-koruptsiynykh-ryzykiv-u-diyalnosti-orhaniv-mistsevoho-samovryaduvannya
34. USAID. (2015). Handbook on corruption risk assessment and development of anti-corruption action plans. USAID. https://wiki.nazk.gov.ua/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/posibn_USAID.pdf
35. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. (2014a, October 14). On the prevention of corruption (Law No. 1700-VII). Official website of the Parliament of Ukraine. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1700-18
36. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. (2014b, September 16). On the purification of power (Law No. 1682-VII). Official website of the Parliament of Ukraine. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1682-18
37. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. (2015, December 10). On civil service (Law No. 889-VIII). Official website of the Parliament of Ukraine. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/889-19
38. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. (2022, June 20). On the anti-corruption strategy for 2021–2025 (Law No. 2322-IX). Official website of the Parliament of Ukraine. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2322-20
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 Oksana Kurylina, Alona Sharapaniuk, Anastasiia Kuvshynova