The purpose of the article is to analyze the concepts of “nepotism”, “favoritism” and “cronyism” as the forms of conflict of interest, as well as to identify the relationship between the dissemination of these phenomena in the context of conflict of interest and the determinants of the latter. Methodology. Taking into account the purpose of the article, the links between the corruption and nepotism, cronyism, favoritism as forms of conflict of interest have been defined based on the method of a systematic analysis. The logical method, as well as comparative and legal method helped to analyze the concepts of “nepotism”, “сronуіsm”, “favoritism” and “clientelism”. The method of induction and deduction enabled to distinguish the key features of favoritism, cronyism, and nepotism. The method of hermeneutics allowed to interpret the above concepts through the prism of the features of corruption. The system and structural method made it possible to make a logical connection between the conflict of interest and the manifestation of favoritism, nepotism and cronyism. The legal modeling method was helpful in drawing conclusions of the research. The results of the study. The pros and cons of using family ties and friendly relations, depending on the scope of nepotism, favoritism and cronyism have been identified as a result of a study. The connection between these phenomena and the spread of conflicts of interest in the public service has been examined. Practical implications. An attempt to identify favoritism, nepotism and cronyism as the form of conflict of interest has been made, as well as some recommendations to amend the relevant legal acts have been provided. Value / originality. For the first time, the authors examined the possibility of having positive results from using nepotism, cronyism and favoritism in forming business environment.

Article presents comparative analysis of features and characteristics of organized criminal associations recommended for further criminalization by provisions of Palermo Convention and Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA. Certain peculiarities of the abovementioned provisions implementation in more than 50 states (Asia, America and Europe) have been outlined. We expressed and proved the hypothesis stating that criminalization of actions performed by the members of organized groups and criminal organizations by different states separately is partly explained with consideration of different international legal acts by national legislators: Palermo Convention and Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA. On the basis of analysis of key global models used to criminalize the socially dangerous actions with aim to counteract the organized crimes (collusion, participation, entrepreneurship, marking/registration) we justified the following opinion: 1) within the limits of criminal associations countering collusion and participation models are considered to be the most efficient; 2) use of entrepreneurship model allows to justify the need for establishment of responsibility for legal entities involved in criminal associations functioning or utilization of relevant criminal measures; 3) registration/marking model may be efficient for counteracting the extended terrorist organizations.

The aim of the article. To analyse the specificities of asset and private interest declaration by public officials and representatives of political power, as well as to suggest the author’s original differentiation of declarations of assets, income, private interests, and gifts. The subject of the study is the procedure for submitting declarations by persons entrusted with functions of the state and local self-government bodies in some countries of Western Europe. Methodology. In the article, the method of deduction and induction enabled to study the features of violating the requirements of financial control through the procedure for submitting a declaration by persons entrusted with functions of the state and local authorities. The methods of deduction and synthesis enabled to define the concept of “asset and interest declaration”, practiced in some countries of Western Europe. A comparative legal analysis enabled to study the procedure for submitting an income and expenditure declaration in some Western European countries, identifying the main types of conflict of interest and income declarations, as well as differentiating persons obliged to submit declarations. The results of the study revealed that the foreign experience of asset declaration is closely intertwined with the private interest declaration. Practical implications. In the study: first, the specificities of foreign declaration practice, according to the subjects of such declaration submission, are outlined; second, the procedures for submitting declarations of income and expenditures, as well as interests, are analysed and compared; third, the author’s perspective on the differentiation of declarations and declarants is substantiated. Relevance/originality. The comparative legal analysis enabled to study the procedure for submitting a declaration of public officials in some countries of Western Europe, empowering to form perspective areas of legislation development in this sphere.

No abstract

No abstract