Литература
Выбор по теме
Выбрать все темы
Отменить выбор
Уголовное законодательство о противодействии коррупции
Антикоррупционное декларирование
Регулирование конфликта интересов
Дарение и получение подарков
Работа по совместительству
Вращающаяся дверь
Антикоррупционные органы
Служебные разоблачения
Общие вопросы
Выбор по стране
Выбрать все страны
Отменить выбор
Австралия
Австрия
Аргентина
Армения
Бангладеш
Беларусь
Бельгия
Болгария
Бразилия
Великобритания
Венгрия
Германия
Гонконг (Китай)
Греция
Грузия
Дания
Индия
Индонезия
Ирландия
Испания
Италия
Казахстан
Канада
Кипр
Киргизия
Китай
Латвия
Литва
Мальта
Мексика
Монголия
Нигерия
Нидерланды
Новая Зеландия
Норвегия
Пакистан
Перу
Польша
Португалия
Россия
Румыния
Саудовская Аравия
Сербия
Сингапур
Словакия
Словения
США
Таджикистан
Турция
Украина
Филиппины
Финляндия
Франция
Хорватия
Чехия
Чили
Швейцария
Швеция
Эстония
ЮАР
Южная Корея
Япония
Выбор по дате
Выбрать все года
Отменить выбор
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1998
1996
1992
Сортировка
По алфавиту ↑
По алфавиту ↓
В хронологическом порядке ↑
В хронологическом порядке ↓
Всего найдено: 1541
Антикоррупционные органы
Швеция
Кабанова О.В., Клевцов А.В. Антикоррупционная политика государства: опыт Швеции. Вестник АКСОР. 2012. № 1. С. 166-176.
Эстония
Поляков М.М. Европейский опыт борьбы с коррупцией органами исполнительной власти и прокуратуры. Известия Тульского государственного университета. Экономические и юридические науки. 2013. № 2-2. С. 160-171.

В статье рассмотрены историко правовые, организационные и законодательные составляющие европейского опыта противодействия коррупции различными органами исполнительной власти, а также органами прокуратуры.

Южная Корея
Choi J-W. Institutional structures and effectiveness of anticorruption agencies: a comparative analysis of South Korea and Hong Kong. Asian Journal of Political Science. 2009. Vol. 17. Iss. 2. Pp. 195-214.
Quah J. Defying institutional failure: learning from the experiences of anti-corruption agencies in four Asian countries. Crime, Law & Social Change. 2010. Vol. 53. Iss. 1. Pp. 23-54.
Quah J.S.T. Benchmarking for excellence: a comparative analysis of seven Asian anti-corruption agencies. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration. 2009. Vol. 31. Iss. 2. Pp. 171-195.

Anti-corruption agencies (ACAs) have been established in many Asian countries to tackle the problem of corruption. However, with the exceptions of the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau in Singapore and the Independent Commission Against Corruption in Hong Kong, many Asian ACAs have been ineffective. What criteria should be used to evaluate their effectiveness? After analyzing the functions of the ACAs in India, Hong Kong, Macao, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea and Thailand, this article recommends that their performance should be benchmarked according to 22 indicators. It concludes that benchmarking provides an ACA with an objective method for evaluating its performance by comparing it with the performance of more effective ACAs. Benchmarking also enables an ACA to improve its performance by introducing reforms to remove the weaknesses exposed by comparison with more effective ACAs in other countries.

Служебные разоблачения
Австралия
Blonder I. Public interests and private passions: a peculiar case of police whistleblowing. Criminal Justice Ethics. 2010. Vol. 29. Iss. 3. Pp. 258-277.
Brown A.J., Latimer P. Symbols or substance? Priorities for the reform of Australian public interest disclosure legislation. Griffin Law Review. 2008. Vol. 17. No. 1. Pp. 223-251.

The last 15 years have seen many developments in Australian public interest disclosure, or "whistleblower protection", legislation. Since 1991, every Australian public law jurisdiction has enacted or introduced such legislation, and in 2004 comparable provisions extended similar principles to Australian corporate law, and to a lesser extent workplace relations. This paper presents key results from a comparative analysis of these legislative regimes, focusing on five issues: who may disclose wrongdoing in the public interest, the types of wrongdoing that may be disclosed, protection of "public" as opposed to internal or regulatory whistleblowing, compensation mechanisms for aggrieved whistleblowers, and how to best achieve effect legal recognition of the obligations of all employers - public or private - towards employees who blow the whistle in the public interest.

This analysis demonstrates the need for greater consistency in the key legal thresholds and operational requirements imposed by Australian whistleblower protection regimes, and the potential for common tests and processes covering both the public and private sectors. In large part, the prospect for accelerating the transition towards more effective, less "symbolic" regimes depends on a clearer consensus about the public importance of employee disclosures and the organisational advantages of open, proactive approaches to disclosure management.
 

Brown, A. J. (Ed.) Whistleblowing in the Australian Public Sector. Canberra. ANU E Press. 2008
Cassematis P., Worthley R. Prediction of whistleblowing or non-reporting observation: the role of personal and situational factors. Journal of Business Ethics. 2013. Vol. 117. Iss. 3. Pp. 615-634.

This study examined whether it was possible to classify Australian public sector employees as either whistleblowers or non-reporting observers using personal and situational variables. The personal variables were demography (gender, public sector tenure, organisational tenure and age), work attitudes (job satisfaction, trust in management, whistleblowing propensity) and employee behaviour (organisational citizenship behaviour). The situational variables were perceived personal victimisation, fear of reprisals and perceived wrongdoing seriousness. These variables were used as predictors in a series of binary logistic regressions.

It was possible to identify whistleblowers on the basis of individual initiative, whistleblowing propensity (individual and organisational), fear of reprisals, perceived wrongdoing seriousness and perceived personal victimisation. It was concluded that whistleblowers are not markedly dissimilar to non-reporting observers. Based on the two most influential variables (perceived personal victimisation and perceived wrongdoing seriousness), the average Australian public sector whistleblower is most likely to be an ordinary employee making a good faith attempt to stop what they perceived to be a serious wrongdoing that was initially identified through personal victimisation.

De Maria W. Common law – common mistakes? Protecting whistleblowers in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and the United Kingdom. International Journal of Public Sector management. 2006. Vol. 19. Iss. 7. Pp. 643-658.
Latimer P., Brown A.J. In whose interest? The need for consistency in to whom and about whom Australian public interest whistleblowers can make protected disclosures. Deakin Law Review. 2007. Vol. 12. No. 2. Pp. 1-21.

Since the 1990s Australia’s nine jurisdictions have passed (or, in the case of the Northern Territory, proposed to pass) public sector whistleblower legislation. The legislation, which reflects different political origins and legislative aims, is not consistent in many respects and there are few common tests across the jurisdictions. This article analyses two issues - who the Australian whistleblower can disclose to, and who the whistleblower can make protected disclosures about. The examination of these issues indicates inconsistencies in the public law whistleblower laws enacted since the 1990s. This inconsistency is not sensible in Australia’s national economy, where an employee in one State can make a protected disclosure, but an employee in another cannot make the same disclosure. This article supports the election commitment of the Rudd federal government in 2007 to introduce best practice federal whistleblowing legislation which will hopefully overcome shortcomings analysed in this article.

Miceli M.P., Near J.P. An international comparison of the incidence of public sector whistle-blowing and the prediction of retaliation: Australia, Norway and the US. Australian Journal of Public Administration. 2013. Vol. 72. Iss. 4. Pp. 433-446.
Porter L.E., Prenzler T. The code of silence and ethical perceptions: exploring police officer unwillingness to report misconduct. Policing. 2016. Vol. 39. Iss. 2. Pp. 370-386.
Бразилия
Sampaio D.B.D. Speak now or forever hold your peace? An essay on whistleblowing and its interfaces with the Brazilian culture. Brazilian Administration Review. 2013. Vol. 10. Iss. 4. Pp. 370-388.

Since the last decade corporate scandals have drawn public attention to the importance of whistleblowers, resulting in the creation of policies and statutes which rely heavily on whistleblowing, especially in the United States. A common assumption behind these efforts is that whistleblowing produces benefits to society at large, as it promotes a more ethical work environment. Still, little is known about many aspects of the decision to blow the whistle on a wrongful act. Particularly in Brazil, where the topic remains neglected by researchers, specific cultural elements may hinder whistleblowing behaviors and limit the generalization of findings from previous studies, which have almost always been based on Anglo-Saxon country context. By exploring this gap, this essay discusses some antecedents of internal whistleblowing and proposes a comprehensive framework which integrates organizational, individual and situational influences in order to allow for a further understanding of the phenomenon and its cultural interfaces, as well as to provide practitioners and researchers with new insights and perspectives on the topic. 

Великобритания
Ashton J. 15 years of whistleblowing protection under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998: are we still shooting the messenger? Industrial Law Journal. 2015. Vol. 44. Iss. 1. Pp. 29-52.
1
...
27
28
29
30
31
...
103