Andrew Žvirblis: The state doesn’t need people, who solve their problems on their own

The deputy director general of the Russian department of Transparency International talks about civic initiatives in Belarus and Russia.

Andrew Žvirblis has recently taken part in the conference on correspondence of the public administration system to new challenges for Belarus. The conference was organized by the Belarusian Institute for Public Administration Reform and Transformation (BIPART). Let us recall that the international non-state organization Transparency International annually presents the Corruption Perception Index – complex index that measures the corruption level in state sector of different countries. Belarus has been traditionally taking higher position in this index in comparison with the former USSR countries (except for the countries that entered the EU – Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia).

“Let me emphasize that the Corruption Perception Index doesn’t measure the level of corruption but indicates the attitude to it among citizens, experts, entrepreneurs, and so on. Basically, I quite admit the fact that the level of corruption in Belarus is lower than in Russia. Administrative procedures are clearer; at the same time, there are less administrative barriers, i.e. less misuse of the existing barriers. It is quite logical: if there is a barrier there, someone might start using it for their own purposes, - notes Andrew Žvirblis in the talk with the “EuroBelarus” Information Service. – The other question is that Belarus has a tendency where the state somewhat misuses the law enforcement and the use of the simplest and, probably, the most efficiently working procedures. From the state’s perspective, it might be good, if the state representatives such as the customs, health service, and other start working with business in order to get taxes from it”. “Given that, - ironically notes deputy director general of the Russian department of Transparency International, - I am somehow sure that there are certain standards and plans for writing out fines – there is such practice in Russia, too, but in Belarus they are observed clearer, tougher, and more rigorously”. “And if these services start working with business and demand money – even if not for the official’s pocket but for the budget instead – there is no benefit for business in it anyway. Belarus gets better rate than Russia in this index; but what it really gets is a big question”.

There are quite a few civic initiatives in Russia, including regional ones that have anti-corruption direction. “Civil society’s participation in anti-corruption work is provided for by international documents that have to be observed, - notes Andrew Žvirblis. – And civil society appeared in these documents for a reason – it was added there also because civil society was one of the main stakeholders, who were lobbying the adoption of UN Convention against corruption”.

The undoubted virtue of NGOs is that they are “independent, and the presence of an independent observer changes the laws of cooperation”: “if there is some organization that is able to watch, observe, and analyze what and how state officials do, this ability affects these state officials a lot. Besides, civil society can often suggest some inventive moves and ideas and – what is important – it isn’t tied by the legislative limitations: if for the official it is prohibited to do everything that isn’t allowed, it is quite the opposite for a citizen – (s)he can do everything that is not prohibited. That’s why we can create a database of declarations without any permission, i.e. we have information and activists, who gather and get a project. We do it only to discover 2-3 years afterwards that this project causes huge interest on the part of the authorities – they see an already working example of what they want to create. We have a lot of such examples in Russia”.

Andrew Žvirblis notes that Russia now has enough civil initiatives, whose actions leave behind the actions of the authorities and that are more efficient than the authorities: "If you step aside from the corruption, you can recall the wonderful cases of voluntary self-organization associated with natural disasters, which have become possible thanks to modern technologies. Now there are a lot of charitable projects, which are working quite stably. Some interactive tool that allows you to accumulate information is created; apart from that, there are the social networks and people’s desire to organize themselves - and we see that civil activists manage to do everything much faster than the bulky state mechanism. And of course, you can look at Ukraine and see how intensively civil society is developing and acting there. I do not really like it when, unfortunately, civil society is moving towards the creation of paramilitary groups; but we need to understand that this is an objective reality, that the war is going on in this country."

Andrew offers Žvirblis to recall the origins of the state, since "this is also a kind of a civil society." "Of course, there are different theories of creation of a state, but one of the most popular is a social contract. And what is the social contract? When people organize themselves to solve common problems. Of course, civil society is independent, it always stands a little bit aside of the authorities; but if we look at the essence of the difference is not so big. We are just less formalized, and this is our usual disadvantage - we have no resources, no knowledge, and so on. At the same time, we have our own benefits", - the activist said.

According to him, the main incentive of people’s self-organization in Russia is infringement of specific interests and citizens’ rights: "People perfectly organize themselves when their interests are infringed. For example, some of the most successful anti-corruption initiatives are those in the sphere of housing management. For example, if the management company charges an exorbitant price for communal payments – people can very efficiently organize themselves, find all the necessary information, learn on the go, a detailed study the Housing Code in detail, and achieve the desired results very efficiently. But the weak point here is that as soon as the result is achieved activists disappear and everything gets dissolved."

"The question arises: the state supports civil society organizations almost everywhere, including Russia and Belarus. But which organizations does it support exactly in our countries? In Belarus, as far as I know, it supports Belarusian Republican Youth Union (BRYU); in Russia, for example, the "Night Wolves". BRYU and "Night Wolves" are, of course, fine, but why can’t it support the same housing initiatives in order to achieve some accumulation of knowledge, not a mere atomized movement? I think that the state doesn’t need it and doesn’t need people that organize themselves and solve their problems together. After all, if today they eliminate the problem with some domestic issue, tomorrow they can go solve the problems that they were not asked to solve", - Andrew Žvirblis said.

Reference. Transparency International is a non-governmental organization that monitors and publicizes corporate and political corruption in international development. This international non-governmental organization was originally founded in Berlin in 1993 by Peter Eigen, a former regional director for the World Bank.

The Russian branch of Transparency International exists as an autonomous non-profit organization "Center "Transparency International - R" (Centre "TI-R") established in 1999. In October 2000, it became part of the international movement of Transparency International.