Reflections: “Leaders of Integrity”

The Leaders of Integrity programme gave participants, particularly employees of anti-corruption agencies, NGOs, and the media, the opportunity to examine the phenomenon of corruption from different perspectives. We share some of them below.

Discussions about corruption often touch on the issue of justice. Many obstacles exist to systemic anti-corruption efforts but are not always related to institutional practices. Thus, worldview conversations can be useful for delving deeper into human nature and understanding our motives.

By discussing the principles and virtues on which institutions are built, we try to understand why people misappropriate resources that we believe do not belong to them. Or what makes people act in one way or another?

During the first discussion platform, we discussed these and other issues with Andrii Andrushkiv, a junior lieutenant of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and a 2016 USPS alumnus.

Ivan Mishchenko, a Supreme Court judge and 2024 USPS alumnus, moderated the next discussion. The discussion was about the judicial system as a benchmark for the development of justice in society.

The Ukrainian judicial system is a product of the Soviet tradition. It has all the flaws and poles. One of its major characteristics is that it perceives itself as an over-incorporated part of the state office. As the state. That is why we hear that the court takes a state position. Today, this self-perception leads to the judicial system becoming an object. In other words, it is an executor, not an initiator. However, if there is a flaw in the system, who should take the initiative to improve or reform it? The state or the courts?

The Soviet system deprived the Ukrainian judiciary of its agency. However, new realities, such as EU integration, bring new demands and challenges. Does the judiciary have the will to take responsibility for its own future?

Trust is the backbone of institutions. The absence or presence of this support determines whether the body will have support from society or not.

Subsequently, in a discussion moderated by Yevhen Krapyvin, a criminal justice expert at the Centre of Policy and Legal Reform, programme participants reflected on the evolution of the criminal justice system. They analysed why, even after determining the vector of changes, we find that in practice, the authorities do not have public confidence in their implementation.

In the context of the anti-corruption fight, public support is an extremely important factor. Lack of trust, at the very least, creates a deadlock, where if there is no trust, there are no tools to win it. In Yevhen’s opinion, the fact that anti-corruption bodies exist separately from the entire criminal justice system is a major obstacle to obtaining this mandate. Indeed, successful anti-corruption reforms strengthen and weaken support for the criminal justice system’s general institutions.

But how can we find a way to build trust in the institutions that are supposed to protect society from unlawful attacks?

Technology is an integral part of life. In this sense, the readiness to understand and deal with modern technologies is primarily an opportunity to protect oneself and the state in the digital space.

Corruption cannot be eradicated by anti-corruption institutions alone. Today, we see a demand for justice not only in public policy but also in the digital space. Against the backdrop of the war, threats are constantly growing that, taking advantage of the low level of cyber hygiene, undermine the entire state’s security. So, in today’s reality, everyone, without exception, must become a link in the chain of resilience.

But how do you ultimately understand new trends? What tools are available to expose injustice and protect oneself? Why is accountability the most important prerequisite in the fight for justice?

Yehor Aushev, CEO of Cyber Unit Technologies, cybersecurity expert and 2016 USPS alumnus, and Artem Starosiek, CEO of Molfar, publisher of AIN.UA, and 2023 USPS alumnus, discussed the issue of sustainability in the digital and information space on various panels.

Journalism accompanied the formation of Ukrainian statehood. It has been one of the connecting bricks of our political consciousness. It is journalism that has shown and continues to show how to be open with and about the authorities.

Publishing corruption investigations is only one step in building a culture of integrity. However, demonstrating openness and a desire for justice signals the need for internal debate and joint work in society. So, what can we do together?

During the Leaders of Integrity programme, Sevhil Musaieva, Editor-In-Chief of Ukrainska Pravda, and Andri Borovyk, Executive Director of Transparency International Ukraine, discussed the impact of investigative journalism and media on the processes of exposing corruption and democratisation.

Confidence in new government initiatives is emerging gradually. Simultaneously, with the creation of tools to gain it.

Public procurement is one of these tools today. It allows for monitoring and evaluating the transparency and efficiency of public spending. At the same time, how effective is this tool? Are there any alternatives that allow us to control the efficient allocation of funds? And what is the place of procurement in the systemic prevention and counteraction to corruption?

Participants discussed these challenges in detail with Oleksandr Shatkovskyi, an international public procurement consultant and 2008 USPS alumnus. The discussion was moderated by Ivan Lakhtionov, Deputy Executive Director for Innovation Projects at Transparency International Ukraine.

There is no doubt that corruption exists during peacetime, crisis, and wartime. However, sensitivity to and intolerance of corruption increases dramatically during the war, as it effectively undermines the state’s capacity. At the same time, they say that the fight against corruption takes too many resources and that its effectiveness is difficult to measure. So what should be done?

In March 1941, the United States established the Senate Special Committee to Investigate the National Defense Program, better known as the Truman Committee. This committee monitored and investigated the risks of corruption and its manifestations. It managed to save between $10 and $15 billion in military spending and save thousands of lives in the American military.

But how did the Committee succeed? What principles underpinned its work? Was it luck or a coordinated effort?

The final stage of the training for the Leaders of Integrity was conducted by Mykhailo Koltsov, PhD in Philosophy and an analyst. Participants actively discussed how Ukraine can use the experience of the Truman Committee to prevent corruption right now. After all, putting it off only prolongs and deepens the existing damage.

The Leaders of Integrity programme was held among people who are already combating corruption at various levels. Knowing that it takes years to build institutions and even longer to gain public trust, the Ukrainian School of Political Studies has organised a training programme aimed at shaping the worldview of the problem that concerns each of us today. However, the programme’s true value is not only in the exchange of experience and knowledge. It is also a platform for creating a network of like-minded people who understand that integrity is not just a word but a daily practice and responsibility.

The Leaders of Integrity programme is implemented with the support of the EU Anti-Corruption Initiative, a leading anti-corruption programme in Ukraine funded by the EU, co-funded and implemented by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark.