1
Volume 04 Issue 03-2022
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
(ISSN
–
2693-0803)
VOLUME
04
I
SSUE
03
Pages:
1-4
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2020:
5.
453
)
(2021:
5.
952
)
(2022:
6.
215
)
OCLC
–
1176274523
METADATA
IF
–
7.659
Publisher:
The USA Journals
ABSTRACT
In the course of performing his official duties, an employee may find himself in a situation where he has a real
opportunity to use his powers for personal gain or to act in the interests of third persons. Such situation, according to
the adopted legislation of most countries, including the Republic of Uzbekistan, is called a conflict of interest. The
regulation of the conflict of interest is aimed at identifying such situations in a timely manner, so as not to allow the
employee to act in it completely independently and not to give an objectively existing opportunity to develop into an
offense, thereby preventing corruption.
The regulation of the conflict of interest allows solving additional tasks:
Identify the circle of related persons who may be involved in corruption schemes;
Apply sanctions when an employee acts in personal interests, but harm is difficult to prove for one reason or
another;
Increase the transparency of the activities of the state div (organization).
However, the main task is still to prevent corruption.
Research Article
REGULATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES
Submission Date:
February 18, 2022,
Accepted Date:
March 05, 2022,
Published Date:
March 14, 2022
|
Crossref doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume04Issue03-01
Nozimakhon Sobirova
Lecturer at the Department of Crime Prevention and Ensuring Public Safety, Specialized Branch of the
Tashkent State Law University, Tashkent, Uzbekistan
Journal
Website:
https://theamericanjou
rnals.com/index.php/ta
jpslc
Copyright:
Original
content from this work
may be used under the
terms of the creative
commons
attributes
4.0 licence.
2
Volume 04 Issue 03-2022
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
(ISSN
–
2693-0803)
VOLUME
04
I
SSUE
03
Pages:
1-4
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2020:
5.
453
)
(2021:
5.
952
)
(2022:
6.
215
)
OCLC
–
1176274523
METADATA
IF
–
7.659
Publisher:
The USA Journals
KEYWORDS
Conflict of interest, corruption, employee, legal acts, international acts.
INTRODUCTION
At the legislative level, the regulation of conflicts of
interest has been most actively implemented since the
60s of the 20th century, especially in the Anglo-Saxon
countries. Although long before that, the term
"conflict of interest" was already used, and many
countries used measures designed to minimize the
influence of the personal interests of employees on
their decisions and actions.
Now the regulation of conflict of interest is widely
recognized as one of the key tools for preventing
corruption, and relevant regulations have been
introduced in one form or another in most countries.
Rules on the regulation of conflicts of interest can be
regulated in various legal acts:
Laws on public service or other laws regulating
service or labor relations, for example, in Armenia
the norms are included in the Law on Public Service
[1], in Indonesia - in the Law on Public
Administration [2];
Framework laws on preventing corruption or on
public ethics, for example, in Argentina the
relevant norms are established by the Law on
Ethics in Public Administration [3], in Moldova - in
the Law on Declaration of Property and Personal
Interests [4] and in the Law on the Code of Conduct
[5], in Ukraine - the Law on the Prevention of
Corruption [6];
Specialized laws on regulation of conflict of
interest, for example, in Canada, general rules are
contained in a separate Law on Conflict of Interest
[7];
Public authorities also adopt their own documents
(codes of conduct) specifying the rules on conflict
of interest. This seems to be the preferred option.
Effective regulation of a conflict of interest
requires detailed regulatory consolidation of
various aspects related to the definition of this
concept, the procedure for declaring interests and
other mechanisms for its identification, the
procedure for taking measures to resolve it, and
ideally,
anti-corruption
restrictions
and
prohibitions closely related to the regulation of a
conflict of interest;
By-laws and jurisdictional acts: for example, in New
Zealand at the federal level there are no rules
obliging you to declare your interests annually,
however, individual bodies prescribe such an
obligation in departmental acts (for example, for
ministers and members of Parliament the rules are
established by the Cabinet Handbook and the
Rules
of
Procedure
of
the
House
of
Representatives [8]); in Malaysia, the norms are
written in by-laws and departmental acts: the Code
of Ethics for Administrative Members and
Members of Parliament, Regulation No. 10 - Civil
Servants (Conduct and Discipline) Regulations
1993, and Service Circular No. 3/2002 - Ownership
and Declaration of Assets by Government Officials.
Additional provisions on the regulation of conflicts of
interest may also be in laws dedicated to certain types
3
Volume 04 Issue 03-2022
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
(ISSN
–
2693-0803)
VOLUME
04
I
SSUE
03
Pages:
1-4
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2020:
5.
453
)
(2021:
5.
952
)
(2022:
6.
215
)
OCLC
–
1176274523
METADATA
IF
–
7.659
Publisher:
The USA Journals
or areas of activity (for example, laws on public
procurement [9], laws in the field of health care,
education, etc.).
International organizations also pay significant
attention to the regulation of conflicts of interest. The
international discussion is fueled by the realization
that, in many democracies, the credibility of
governments can be undermined primarily through the
abuse of power. In this regard, according to the
prevailing international opinion, through greater
impartiality,
transparency,
openness
and
accountability,
through
appropriate
oversight
mechanisms, the governing institutions could regain
the trust of the population. International anti-
corruption instruments of a legally binding nature, as
well as what is known as “soft rules” (norms that are
not binding) contain provisions on preventive
measures, i.e., Standards (codes of conduct),
guidelines and tools for holding the public sector
accountable to address conflicts of interest:
Inter-American Convention against Corruption
(Article 3: preventive measures); [10]
Economic Community of West African States
Protocol against Corruption (Article 5: preventive
measures);
African Union Convention on Preventing and
Combating Corruption (Article 7: Corruption and
Related Offenses in the Public Service);
United Nations Convention against Corruption,
adopted in 2003 - UNCAC (chapter II: preventive
measures); [11]
UN International Code of Conduct for Public
Officials (Article II: Conflict of Interest and
Disqualification); [12]
Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development: Guidelines for Managing Conflict of
Interest in the Public Service - Public Sector
Transparency and Accountability; [13]
Council of Europe: model code of conduct for
public officials (art. 13: conflict of interest).
But it is necessary to pay attention to the fact that the
presence of international standards does not mean at
all that there are any common generally accepted
approaches to regulating conflicts of interest. Rather,
the opposite site is true: international agreements
leave countries with greater freedom of action, and
their approaches to formulating the relevant
legislation and building the necessary infrastructure
differ markedly.
The regulation of conflicts of interest is not a very
common anti-corruption tool. This can be explained by
the fact that most anti-corruption measures are built
on the principle of “prohibition – sanction”: an
employee is prohibited from specific actions or being
in a certain situation, while penalties are provided for
non-compliance with the relevant prohibition.
The very fact of being in a conflict of interest situation
is not in itself an offense, since in this case the
employee has the opportunity to use official powers
for personal gain, but he has not yet realized this
opportunity. At the same time, the employee can quite
independently, without the intervention of the
regulator, choose the right course of action.
Therefore, a conflict of interest in itself is not equal to
corruption, and there is no reason to punish for it. But
a conflict of interest can escalate into corruption.
Increasingly, countries are choosing to play it safe and
not rely on the employee's completely free ethical
choice. It is easier to try to prevent a corruption
offense than to deal with its identification and
elimination of its consequences later. As a result,
4
Volume 04 Issue 03-2022
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
(ISSN
–
2693-0803)
VOLUME
04
I
SSUE
03
Pages:
1-4
SJIF
I
MPACT
FACTOR
(2020:
5.
453
)
(2021:
5.
952
)
(2022:
6.
215
)
OCLC
–
1176274523
METADATA
IF
–
7.659
Publisher:
The USA Journals
measures are introduced to regulate such situations,
legal acts are adopted, and typical situations are fixed
that are considered a conflict of interest.
REFERENCES
1.
Law of March 23, 2018 No. 206-N “On Public
Service”
2.
Law No. 30 of 2014 on Public Administration
3.
Law of October 26, 1999 No. 25.188 "On ethics in
the implementation of public administration"
4.
Law of June 17, 2016 No. 133 “On Declaration of
Property and Personal Interests”
5.
Law of February 22, 2008 No. 25 “On the code of
official conduct for civil servants”
6.
Law of October 14, 2014 No. 1700-VII “On the
Prevention of Corruption”
7.
Prevention of Conflicts of Interest Act 2006
8.
Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General of
New Zealand. Managing conflicts of interest: A
guide for the public sector (Controller and Auditor-
General of New Zealand. Managing conflicts of
interest: A guide for the public sector)
9.
Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On Public
Procurement” dated April 22, 2021 No. ZRU-684 //
National Legislation Database, April 23, 2021, No.
03/21/684/0367
10.
Signed in Caracas, Venezuela, 03/29/96.
11.
Adopted by General Assembly resolution 58/4 of 31
October 2003
12.
Adopted by General Assembly resolution 51/59 of
12 December 1996
13.
OECD, June 2003
