Jump to content

Talk:Corruption in Ukraine

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Related discussions:

Impressions

[edit]

My impression is that an effort is being made to deal with corruption. A natural consequence of this is that measures of perceived corruption have gone up - the reason is partly because more cases of corruption are being talked about, and partly that people are beginning to recognise corrupt practices as corrupt.--Toddy1 (talk) 21:38, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Look up Bamboozle in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
My impression is that the Ukrainians are getting bamboozled (to quote the Immortal Technique song Bin Laden: "Look at they mansions, then look at the conditions you live in"). Anyhow not much sources of 2010 and 2011 are being used in this article... So did the effort to deal with corruption start in 2007? — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 13:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
When the Liberals were in power, they certainly talked about dealing with corruption. Little signs appeared in some places telling people not to offer bribes - I assume that you have noticed them when your passport is inspected at airports. The current government is making real efforts to put some of this rhetoric into action - and being criticised by the foreign press for doing so. (Apparently Kiev-based foreign journalists don't like their former friends in the previous government being investigated for corruption. In practice, it is very hard to investigate corruption by those still in power, as they have the power to block it. But once people lose power, the wheels of justice can roll with less impediments.)
It is hard to know where all this will end up. Yanukovic and his predecessor Yushchenko are a lot alike. Maybe you are right, and it is all just makeup on a pig. I do not know.--Toddy1 (talk) 15:12, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why not look at the 2011 assessment for Ukraine published by Transparency International. I have looked at bits of it as a result of this conversation. It confirms what I thought that many of the measures taken by the Liberals when they were in power were not very effective. The report is depressing. Basically, the under-40 generation sees corruption as normal. The over-60 generation sees it as abnormal. Somewhere between a third and a half of people have bribed a service provider in the past year.--Toddy1 (talk) 15:36, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious

[edit]

The current line is being currently tagged as dubious: Transparency International estimates that up to 10 percent of Ukrainians’ incomes are spent on bribes. The fact that Transparency International claims this is not dubious.... I got the feeling that the tagger of the line does not agree with this estimation... But I think it would be better to list other estimates there and don't shoot the messenger... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 13:28, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At the time I tagged it as dubious, it was because the article merely cited one article in the Kyiv Post. (This is still the same now.)
I think that the article should at the very least also cite a report (or something) from Transparency International, and give an indication in a footnote of the method used by Transparency International (TI) to arrive at this estimate.--Toddy1 (talk) 14:59, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see the problem now... On a different or similar note. The problem with organizations like TI is that they might be a boy who cried wolf and that since I am not living in Ukraine I might get the wrong perspective from them..... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 15:17, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is a need for balance. Kyiv Post is not balanced.--Toddy1 (talk) 15:37, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also think Kyiv Post is not great, but it seems to be the only source in English with regulary updates about corruption in Ukraine.... — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:51, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I looked for the report by Transparency International saying that they estimate that up to 10 percent of Ukrainians’ incomes are spent on bribes. As far as I could tell, none of the reports I consulted had such a statement.--Toddy1 (talk) 22:28, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted the claim based on Kyiv Post 2 July 2009 that up to 10 percent of Ukrainians’ incomes are spent on bribes.Bribes and taxes

It appears to be a misreporting information from MSI. MSI does Transparency International's surveys in Ukraine. Juhani Grossmann works for them. Kyiv Post on 25 June 2009 published claims by Juhani Grossmann that based on surveys it was estimated that more than $400m was in bribes annually - Ukraine has a population of about 45m, so $400m would equate to an estimated average of $9 per person annually.

It would seem likely that "up to 10 percent of Ukrainians’ incomes" should have said "an average of up to 10 US dollars of Ukrainians’ incomes".--Toddy1 (talk) 16:44, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah better delete it.... Think it was also guesswork from Kyiv Post. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 16:54, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to know about Juhani Grossmann, this is his LinkedIn profile. This is a self-published source.--Toddy1 (talk) 17:02, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Election fraud

[edit]

At the time of the election in 2004, the bookshop in the shopping mall in Korolenko Street in the city had an American book about how the Gore and the Democrats tried to use the law to steal the US presidential election from the Republicans in 2000. (The book appeared to be written from the Republican point of view.) I never bought the book. I have no idea how many copies of this English-language book were imported into Ukraine. It is possible that this book gave the liberals in Ukraine the idea of doing the same thing in Ukraine - which of course is how Yushchenko won the election. Opinions are divided about whether the second round of the 2004 election was any more unfair than the rerun.--Toddy1 (talk) 17:30, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yanukovych signs law

[edit]

to reinforce the responsibility of officials, state agencies and local government.Is this also an anti-corruption measure? — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 17:26, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

yes--Toddy1 (talk) 20:03, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References for further expansion of article

[edit]

Balanced reflection of the Ukrainian sources

[edit]

Ladies and gentlemen, publications covering position of the Yanukovych government on corruption may create a false "after/before" picture which is actively pushed by the dependent media. With Tymoshenko being a case celebre of the imagined "war on corruption" since 2010. I'd like to point all of you to the equally abundant independent publications demonstrating that people aligned with the regime are rarely casualties of the above-mentioned "war". Very rarely). Anyway, worsening Transparency Intl. indices are incompatible with any positive "trends" and "estimates" at all.

BTW, cited Kost Bondarenko is a demonstrably-partial long-term pundit and consultant for the Party of Regions - something which is widely reflected in the independent media and never denied by himself. Wishes, Ukrained2012 (talk) 15:49, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is a controversial subject - it needs to be based on what sources say. I am considering partially or wholly reverting a recent edit by you, that I feel is taking the article away from that position.--Toddy1 (talk) 21:32, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You're fully entitled to do so. But should we remove Mr.Bondarenko's partial "opinion" as well? Ukrained2012 (talk) 09:06, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No we should not remove Bondarenko's statement, which is properly cited. It is not dubious in any way. Of course like anyone involved in Ukrainian politics Bondarenko is not impartial. But then the Kyiv Post is not impartial either; it is a pro-liberal newspaper with a very strong bias against the conservatives. We still use Kyiv Post as a source, but make sure that it is cited so readers can judge for themselves where the information/claims come from. Wikipedia is based on sources, with rules on how they are used.--Toddy1 (talk) 11:54, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Can I make it clear. I have no objections to many of the kinds of statements you wish to see in the article, providing that they are properly cited. (i.e. there need to be citations to reliable sources that actually say these things, and the way the sources are used must be compliant with Wikipedia rules.) Though, it is also important though that the article is reasonably impartial (which is what we worked hard to achieve). The article must not become a liberal/right-wing-extremist anti-conservative attack page.--Toddy1 (talk) 12:07, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have underlined the changes made by an editor on 24 August to a passage in the article.

Since July 1, 2011, the President, Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada, Prime Minister, Prosecutor General, ministers and other Ukrainian top officials have been formally liable for prosecution[clarification needed] for corruption.[1]
  1. ^ Ukraine Advances on Anti-Corruption Practices Reuters {Reuters is not responsible for the content in this press release} (June 10, 2011)

    2. Adding the word "formally" implies that they are not really liable to prosecution. But the cited source does not contain this word, or any other words that imply that they are not really liable to prosecution. The addition of the word "formally" is against Wikipedia policy - see WP:ALLEGED.

    As for the CLARIFY tag, what is there to clarify?

    Here is another section with the change underlined:

    The following table shows average scores from a survey of public[clarification needed] perception of corruption in Ukraine's institutions. Comparable figures for the United Kingdom and the United States for 2009 are shown at the bottom of the table.

    What is there to clarify? Transparency International explain the methods used in their reports. The concept of doing surveys to discover what the public think is well known.

    I have removed the above mentioned changes, and also DUBIOUS tag placed next to Bondarenko's statement.--Toddy1 (talk) 13:23, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    I could agree with all your edits given your declared intent to further balancing the article. Except for the last tag: the "Public Perception of Corruption in Institutions of Ukraine" is ambiguous as it's not clear public in what countries was "surveyed". Was that about Ukraine public opinion on their domestic corruption, or worldwide opinion on corruption inside Ukraine? Would somebody rephrase?
    And I'm not sure whom are you calling "conservatives" in Ukraine. This is not a view supported by any reliable foreign or Ukrainian media. To put it simply, there's the regime and the rest of society here. With demonstrably no support for regime whatsoever: every each claim of such a support is being crushed by the media within hours with evidence of falsifying, distortion, directly influencing of bloggers/pollsters/TV owners etc.
    Looking forward to further cooperation in improving the article. Ukrained2012 (talk) 11:52, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Transparency International surveys people about corruption in their own country. You will notice that in the table in the article there are rows for USA and UK for comparative purposes.--Toddy1 (talk) 12:47, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    "Juridical" or "Judicial"?

    [edit]

    "Juridical" sounds strange to me, not a lawyer or native speaker though. Ukrained2012 (talk) 09:06, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    "Juridical" is a correct English-language word. This link explains the difference between the words "juridical" and "judicial".--Toddy1 (talk) 11:58, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, Ukrained2012 (talk) 11:53, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    The Family

    [edit]

    According to [1], there is a concept of "Family" as a major corrupting group of individuals, connected to the Yanukovych presidential family. This seems like worth discussing in the article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 20:24, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    This article is intended as a high-level party politics-neutral article. It is best kept that way. So if you want to cover this issue, please make sure that you also cover similar activities by Leonid Kuchma, Yulia Tymoshenko, and Pavlo Lazarenko and their associates. Ten years ago, a friend told me that all the bad things the liberals said about Yanukovych were true, but the liberals were even worse.--Toddy1 (talk) 11:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Ukrainians continue to pay bribes (reference)

    [edit]

    I found an interesting article about Ukrainian corruption on Ukrayinska Pravda today. But I'm on a wikibreak now. So I am parking it here:

    The new supposedly-incorruptible police in Kharkov take bribes.-- Toddy1 (talk) 22:07, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Ukraine's progress on decorruptifying

    [edit]

    Is there an article about Ukraine's attempts to become less corrupt, or is this it? — Ríco 02:57, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    This is it.-- Toddy1 (talk) 07:58, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Toddy1! Thanks for your answer.
    It seems like such an important topic! The news is covering it... If Ukraine doesn't decorruptify more, the world won't want to help them — or give them financial support.[2] The people will be up in arms, and Crimeans may even prefer being part of Russia.
    Is this encyclopedic yet, or should we wait, watch and see what happens?
    More importantly, what about the incident when Poroshenko fired Kolomoysky -- one of Ukraine's richest men -- as governor of the eastern region of Dnipropetrovsk?
    That's not in the article, but it was big news when it happened...[3][4] — Ríco 16:54, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I added the bit about Kolomoysky. It can be modified to be made part of a more general 2015 taking-on-the-oligarchs deal. I think we should wait on the Korban arrest, now that it's here in this thread, and see if anything comes of it. -- Ríco 20:07, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Please note that the source you added in your 21:31 04 November edit makes no mention of corruption. You cannot therefore use it in the article. Did you mean to post a different link?-- Toddy1 (talk) 21:31, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    We now have many allies in the West and these allies will stand with us so long as we show political will, responsibility and the unchanging nature of our goals and values as we carry out reform.

    — Prime Minister Arseniy Yatseniuk, in a government meeting.

    The link I added — pointing to the Reuters article, “Ukraine PM: Country Risks Losing Foreign Support Over Reform Delay” — seemed (at first glance) to bolster my talk page comment that, "If Ukraine doesn't decorruptify more, the world won't want to help them — or give them financial support."
    The Reuters article mentioned that "Ukraine risks losing the support of its Western backers if squabbles [...] delay or derail its reform efforts". The reform is "revamp[ing] its tax system," but the article only focuses on the size of tax cuts. So, as it turns out, it doesn't support my comment as well as I thought I would. — Ríco 01:49, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    2014 Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index scores

    [edit]

    According to this, the Corruption Perceptions Index scores are out, and Ukraine's was 26 in 2014, 25 in 2013, and 26 in 2012. How does this reconcile with the article — which states that the figures were 2.5 in 2013, and 2.6 in 2012? The sources cite support what I'm claiming here, and not what's in the article. — Ríco 20:55, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    This is very interesting. It states, "CPI scores before 2012 are not comparable over time." Shouldn't we remove the table rows that are for years before 2012 then? This is even more illuminating. — Ríco 21:11, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    When the article was created by @Yulia Romero:, I found that some statistics in newspaper articles were inaccurate (see Talk:Corruption in Ukraine#Dubious), so I created the tables from data in Transparency International reports. The article explains that the "methods used in assessing the Index change from year to year, so comparisons between years are difficult."
    The claim that Ukraine is the most corrupt country in Europe is flaky. This year I went to a presentation by Transparency International that said that Russia is vastly worse than Ukraine. The man from Transparency International explained that naive Westerners get taken in by Russian propaganda; in Ukraine corruption is a problem that affects the system, whereas in Russia corruption is the system.
    No deleting data before 2012 would not be helpful. The reasons for having them are explained at the top of the talk page. There is a history of anti-corruption initiatives by new governments: in 2005 by the liberals, in 2010 by the conservatives, in 2014 by the liberals and their allies. They take measures to stop the corruption that affects ordinary people, and also have their opponents investigated for corruption and/or gangsterism. Western journalists cried foul when liberal politicians who were corrupt and had links to organised crime were prosecuted.- Toddy1 (talk) 21:59, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    If you look at the table of corruption perception index scores you will see a discontinuity between 2003 and 2004. Up to 2003 they used standard deviation as a measure of uncertainty. From 2004 they used a "confidence range" to express the same idea.-- Toddy1 (talk) 22:03, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Your knowledge of the subject is impressive. Please add to it by reading this:

    The Corruption Perceptions Index 2012 has been calculated using an updated methodology. This has been developed following a comprehensive review and consultation process, both within the Transparency International movement and with the help of external experts. The updated methodology has been reviewed and validated by an independent statistical assessment.

    The Corruption Perceptions Index uses an approach that provides greater clarity on how the index is constructed, making it easier to trace how the data from the sources are rescaled for inclusion in the Index.

    The updated method also means that a country’s Corruption Perceptions Index score will better capture changes in perceptions of corruption in the public sector of that country over time. However, due to the update in the methodology, 2011 CPI scores are not comparable with CPI 2012 scores.

    To reflect the updates that have been made to the methodology, the CPI 2012 will henceforth be presented on a 0-100 scale. This is to clearly demonstrate that scores from the CPI 2011 and previous editions should not be compared with scores from 2012.

    — Transparency International, Corruption Perceptions Index 2012: An updated methodology (emphasis added)

    This seems to contradict your contention, and also what you wrote into the article. It suggests that it would take more than just dividing the numbers by ten to make the scores comparable. The reason the scores were changed to a 0-100 scale was to make it clear that the scores pre and post 2012 were not compatible. By dividing the scores, from 2012 on, by ten — you are actually making them look comparable, defeating TI's efforts. — Ríco 03:59, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I, User:Yulia Romero, is currently on a long WP:Wikibreak (stuff to do outside Wikipedia) so I will not give any content input input here. But it is nice to know that this important Wikipedia article is found to be important by others then me. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 22:34, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    [edit]

    Hello fellow Wikipedians,

    I have just modified 3 external links on Corruption in Ukraine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

    When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

    This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

    • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
    • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

    Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:48, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    [edit]

    Hello fellow Wikipedians,

    I have just modified 3 external links on Corruption in Ukraine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

    When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

    This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

    • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
    • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

    Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:43, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Article severely outdated not reflecting Russian role in promoting and reinforcing corruption as part of occupation preparations

    [edit]

    Since 2014, massive amount of facts was uncovers about Russian role in Party of Regions, in Yanukovich regime.

    To point just one blatant misnomer: Yanukovich is NOT a President of Ukraine, he's been stripped of the titles years ago.

    Given the facts known now, suggest renaming the article 'Corruption in Ukraine during marionette regime of Yanukovich'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.5.5.243 (talk) 22:09, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    I have added more details and framed the history within Post-Soviet relations between Ukraine and Russia Jgmac1106 (talk) 02:29, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Editorial comment moved from article

    [edit]

    I reverted the following editorial comment by Eiregal (talk · contribs) from the article lead since it is more appropriately placed here on the article talk page:

    This article is very out of date.

    Diff of Eiregal's action in adding the comment is Special:Diff/1075845127/1076215803

    Dieter.Meinertzhagen (talk) 03:10, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    What does this mean?

    [edit]

    "with no chances to implement a European choice of the Ukrainian people"

    I can make some guesses as to what might be intended here but I think someone who is in a position to know needs to fix it so that it means something. 2600:380:A611:9089:DC59:2285:3195:B063 (talk) 23:31, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Meaning of quoted percentages

    [edit]

    The prevalence of corruption in the various categories are quoted as a percentage without an indication of what the percentage is of. 86.175.43.240 (talk) 22:33, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I have tried to fix by moving into a new section called Comparative Research. I looked at other Corruption in *Country* pages and no clear text structure is used. They did not fit history and I did not want to delete given past editors so I figured new section was best solution for now. Jgmac1106 (talk) 02:12, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There is also an "extent" section I renamed to perception. This could possibly be combined. This article is longer than most corruption articles on other countries and I do not want to create a perceived bias through length Jgmac1106 (talk) 02:28, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Corruption_in_Ukraine&oldid=1221309228"