Corruption without frontiers?

Corruption rate keeps going up at the Ukrainian border checkpoints, reported on September 23 a team of experts working on the project “Worthy Ukraine” at a press conference. They made public the results of a comparative analysis of corruption in Ukraine’s customs authorities in 2007–2009. This analysis was carried out in collaboration with company InMind in November – December 2007 (baseline study) and April through May 2009 (repeated survey).

According to the investigation and monitoring expert Svitlana Horna, this survey was carried out using a combination of techniques, including the polling of exporting and importing companies and experts: “The number of respondents who experienced acts of corruption at the customs stations has increased from 36 percent on record in 2007 to 43 percent this year. This is a tangible increment.” The expert added that there are more acts of corruption on the part of customs officers in western than eastern Ukraine.

Since the time of the baseline survey Ukrainian companies have not changed their overall view of the rate of corruption in the customs sphere. The respondents believe that crossing the border is the most corrupt phase of the customs procedures (61 percent in 2007 and 65 percent in 2009). However, when asked by experts about the particular stage at which company bribed customs officers, the answers offered by the respondents were somewhat different. “Every third company (31 percent) has experienced corruption on the part of customs officers when crossing the border, whereas the document-checking procedures rank first,” says Horna.

There are three most popular corruption methods: extortion, voluntary bribe-giving, and the usage of personal contacts. By comparison, acts of extortion were slightly more frequent (by four percent) than voluntary bribery, which has gone up by five percent.

According to the respondents, the most corrupt officials at the border are customs inspectors (68 percent in 2007 and 71 percent in 2009), customs managers, and heads of departments.

When companies were asked about how often they made unofficial payments, their answers revealed the following situation: the number of importers has dropped from 42 to 35 percent, whereas that of the exporters has increased from 28 to 36 percent. “There is, of course, a positive aspect, considering that the number of companies that operate honestly, openly, and transparently and never resort to unofficial payments has increased from 10 percent in 2007 to 19 percent in 2009,” says Horna.

Most of the surveyed companies do not trust the government to combat corruption and believe that whatever measures it is taking prove ineffective, although some of the importers and exporters still believe that corruption in the customs sphere can be overcome. They say reductions in the amount of paperwork, improved customs legislation, and simplified border-crossing and customs clearance procedures are among the best ways to combat corruption. They further expect good results from the fact that the Ukrainian State Customs Service has joined the EU’s New Computerized Transit System (NCTS).

Researchers attribute rampant corruption at the border checkpoints to the high level of reliability that “gentlemen’s agreements” have. The experts polled within the framework of “Worthy Ukraine” voiced their own views of the reasons behind the soaring corruption rate. The comparative study report quotes a Kyiv-based expert as saying: “There is no joint action plan today, just as there are no promising ideas or any attempts to take care of tomorrow and of what the coming generation will do. All our bureaucrats want is building a personal fortune, here and now.”

The survey revealed the most popular ways of evading customs clearance duties. These include, for example, reporting lower value of merchandise. A broker from Odesa points to another way to bypass the official border-crossing procedures: “The certificate of conformity is lacking. They agree on a copy produced using Photoshop, and the goods are cleared.”