##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

This study presents a comprehensive overview of the role of the Venice Commission in providing constitutional recommendations for Albania, Georgia, and Ukraine in their fight against corruption, as well as the measures taken by their governments to establish anti-corruption structures. The inclusion of these countries is motivated by the European Union's (EU) regulations and requirements for accession, which require significant progress in combating corruption and strengthening the rule of law as key criteria for membership. The Commission has been involved in providing recommendations and assistance to improve their legal frameworks and institutions in the fight against corruption, and its opinions carry significant weight as they are based on international standards and best practices in the field of constitutional law.

By analyzing the Venice Commission’s work in Albania, Georgia, and Ukraine, one can understand the unique context and circumstances of each country and identify effective strategies for combating corruption and promoting good governance. This information can be useful for academics, and anti-corruption advocates who seek to comprehend the challenges and opportunities associated with corruption in Albania, Georgia, and Ukraine. This paper explores the Commission’s role and impact in these countries and assesses the effectiveness of its interventions in promoting good governance and transparency. One key finding of this study is the importance of political will in effectively combating corruption. The findings suggest that the Venice Commission has played a crucial role in supporting anti-corruption efforts in Albania, Georgia, and Ukraine, but more needs to be done to address the root causes of corruption and strengthen the rule of law in these countries.

References

  1. A. Movchan, A. Babiak, M. Movchan. (2021). Issues of the improvement of anti-corruption system in Ukraine. Proceedings of the International Conference on Business, Accounting, Management, Banking, Economic Security and Legal Regulation Research, Atlantis Press. Retrieved from 10.2991/aebmr.k.210826.023.
     Google Scholar
  2. Albanian Center for Economic Research. (2007). Corruption and Anti-corruption Policies in Albania.
     Google Scholar
  3. Blooms, I. (2021). Former Ukrainian Minister accused of running global smuggling racket in Africa & S Asia. Retrieved from https://www.indiablooms.com/world-details/F/28681/former-ukrainian-minister-accused-of-running-global-smuggling-racket-in-africa-s-asia.html.
     Google Scholar
  4. Buccicchio, G. (2021). "It will be difficult for judges to accept this": how the justice system in Ukraine should change. International security and European integration of Ukraine. Retrieved from https://www.eurointegration.com.ua/articles/2021/06/8/7124199/.
     Google Scholar
  5. Council of Europe. (2020). Joint GRECO-Venice Commission Letter to Speaker of Verkhovna Rada, Réf J.Dem.486 GB/SGM/GE. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/files/2020_10_31_UKR_JointGRECOVeniceCommissionLetterSpeakerVerkhovnaRada.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  6. De Graaf, G. (2007). Causes of corruption: towards a contextual theory of corruption. Public Administration Quarterly, 31(1/2), 39–86. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41288282.
     Google Scholar
  7. European Commission - Albania. (2022). Albania 2022 Report, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee, and the Committee of the Regions. Brussels. Retrieved from https://neighbourhood-enlargement.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-10/Albania%20Report%202022.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  8. European Commission-Georgia. (2022). Opinion on the EU membership application by Georgia. Brussels. Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/Sara/Downloads/Opinion_on_the_EU_membership_application_by_Georgia.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  9. European Commission-Ukraine. (2020). EU-Ukraine Association Implementation Report on Anti-Corruption. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/default/files/20201118-ukraine-association-implementation-report-on-anti-corruption.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  10. European Commission. (2001). Regular report on Albania's progress towards accession (No. SEC (2001) 1758 final).
     Google Scholar
  11. Exit News. (2019). Albanian Election Gate: Wiretaps Reveal Collusion Between Crime Boss, Ministers, MPs, and Police. Retrieved from https://exit.al/en/albanian-electiongate-wiretaps-reveal-collusion-between-crime-boss-ministers-mps-and-police/.
     Google Scholar
  12. Freedom House. (2021). Nations in transit 2021: Dropping the democratic facade. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/report/nations-transit.
     Google Scholar
  13. Gunjic, I. (2022). Albania's Special Courts against Corruption and Organized Crime. U4 Anti-Corruption Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.u4.no/publications/albanias-special-courts-against-corruption-and-organised-crime.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  14. Karpyak, O. (2013). Ukraine's two different revolutions. BBC News. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-25210230.
     Google Scholar
  15. Klitgaard, R. (1988). Controlling Corruption. University of California Press.
     Google Scholar
  16. Kuvendi i Republikës së Shqipërisë. (2016). Ligj Nr.84/2016 për rivlerësimin kalimtar të gjyqëtarëve dhe prokurorëve në Republikën e Shqipërisë. Retrieved from https://kpk.al/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/LIGJI_NR_84_2016_OK.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  17. Mehmetaj, J. (2019). The Venice Commission and its impact on the justice system. Frankfurt, Germany: International Conference on Research in Social Sciences and Humanities. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/files/articles/Mehmetaj_Jonida_ALB_2019_paper.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  18. Mungiu-Pippidi, A. (2013). The quest for good governance: How societies develop control of corruption. Cambridge University Press.
     Google Scholar
  19. Open Society Foundations. (2019). Understanding Ukraine's Euromaidan Protests. Retrieved from https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/explainers/understanding-ukraines-euromaidan-protests.
     Google Scholar
  20. Paul, A. (2010). Ukraine-Never a boring moment. Opinion - EuObserver. Retrieved from https://euobserver.com/opinion/30970.
     Google Scholar
  21. Reuters. (2020). Georgian opposition leader gets three more years in jail. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-georgia-opposition-arrests-idUKKBN20428R.
     Google Scholar
  22. RFE/RL's Ukrainian Service. (2019). Ukrainian Parliament passes constitutional amendment to Reflect EU, NATO Aspirations. Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty. Retrieved from https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-parliament-passes-constitutional-amendment-to-reflect-eu-nato-aspirations/29756695.html.
     Google Scholar
  23. RFE/RL's Ukrainian Service. (2023). Ukrainian government official dismissed after arrest on suspicion of embezzlement. Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty. Retrieved from https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-official-lozynskiy-dismissed-embezzlement-defense-ministry/32234595.html.
     Google Scholar
  24. T. I. (2021). Corruption Perceptions Index 2020. Retrieved from https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2020/index/nzl.
     Google Scholar
  25. Transparency International. (2022). Corruption Perceptions Index. Retrieved from https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2021?gclid=Cj0KCQjwz6ShBhCMARIsAH9A0qVAFhHZDf2SlBPKravp1v82Qt29gRWguKAcIEC2TsL6dAujl5y32yQaAjzFEALw_wcB.
     Google Scholar
  26. Ukrinform. (2020). Court arrests ex-ecology minister Zlochevsky in absentia. Retrieved from https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-polytics/3082766-court-arrests-execology-minister-zlochevsky-in-absentia.html.
     Google Scholar
  27. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2011). Corruption in Albania: Retrieved from https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/corruption/Albania_corruption_report_2011_web_small.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  28. Venice Commission & OSCE/ODIHR. (2011). Joint opinion on the electoral law and the electoral practice of Albania adopted by the Council for Democratic Elections at its 39th meeting (Venice, 15 December 2011) and by the Venice Commission at its 89th plenary session (Venice, 16–17 December 2011). European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2011)042-e.
     Google Scholar
  29. Venice Commission. (2005). CDL-AD (2005)015-e Opinion on the amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine adopted on 8.12.2004 adopted by the Commission at its 63rd plenary session. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2005)015-e.
     Google Scholar
  30. Venice Commission. (2010). CDL-AD (2010)028-e Final opinion on the draft constitutional law on amendments and changes to the constitution of Georgia. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2010)028-e.
     Google Scholar
  31. Venice Commission. (2010). CDL-AD (2010)044-e Opinion on the Constitutional Situation in Ukraine adopted by the Venice Commission at its 85th Plenary Session, Venice (17-18 December 2010). European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2010)044-e.
     Google Scholar
  32. Venice Commission. (2014). CDL-AD (2014)037-e Opinion on the Draft law amending the Constitution of Ukraine, submitted by the President of Ukraine on 2 July 2014, endorsed by the Venice Commission at its Plenary Session. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2014)037-e.
     Google Scholar
  33. Venice Commission. (2014). Interim Opinion on the Draft Law on Special State Prosecutor's Office of Montenegro, CDL-AD (2014)041. European Commission for Democracy through Law.
     Google Scholar
  34. Venice Commission. (2015). CDL-AD (2015)045, Interim Opinion on the Draft Constitutional Amendments on the Judiciary of Albania. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2015)045-e.
     Google Scholar
  35. Venice Commission. (2016). CDL-AD (2016)017-e Georgia-Opinion on the Amendments to the Organic Law on the Constitutional Court and to the Law on Constitutional Legal Proceedings. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2016)017-e.
     Google Scholar
  36. Venice Commission. (2016). CDL-AD (2016)036-e Albania-Amicus Curiae Brief for the Constitutional Court on the Law on the Transitional Re-evaluation of Judges and Prosecutors (The Vetting Law) CDL-AD (2016)036-e. European Commission for Democracy through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2016)036-e.
     Google Scholar
  37. Venice Commission. (2017). CDL-AD (2017)020-e Ukraine-Opinion on the Draft Law on Anticorruption Courts and on the Draft Law on Amendments to the Law on the Judicial System and the Status of Judges (concerning the introduction of mandatory specialization of judges on the consider. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2017)020-e.
     Google Scholar
  38. Venice Commission. (2018). Opinion on Draft Constitutional Amendments Enabling the Vetting of Politicians: Albania. Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2018)034-e.
     Google Scholar
  39. Venice Commission. (2019). CDL-AD (2019)006-e Georgia-Opinion on the concept of the legislative amendments to the Criminal procedure code concerning the relationship between the prosecution and the investigators. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2019)006-e.
     Google Scholar
  40. Venice Commission. (2019). CDL-AD (2019)009-e Georgia-Urgent Opinion on the selection and appointment of Supreme Court judges, issued pursuant to Article 14a of the Venice Commission's Rules of Procedure on 16 April 2019. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2019)009-e.
     Google Scholar
  41. Venice Commission. (2019). CDL-AD (2019)027-e Ukraine-Opinion on the Legal framework in Ukraine governing the Supreme Court and judicial self-governing bodies. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2019)027-e.
     Google Scholar
  42. Venice Commission. (2019). Draft Opinion on the powers of the President to set the dates of elections in a parliamentary system, CDL (2019)027. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL(2019)027-e.
     Google Scholar
  43. Venice Commission. (2020). CDL-PI (2020)018-e Ukraine-Urgent Joint Opinion of the Venice Commission and the Directorate General of Human Rights and Rule of Law (DGI) of the Council of Europe on the legislative situation regarding anti-corruption mechanisms. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-PI(2020)018-e.
     Google Scholar
  44. Venice Commission. (2020). Opinion on the appointment of judges to the Constitutional Court, CDL-AD(2020)010. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2020)010-e.
     Google Scholar
  45. Venice Commission. (2021). Ukraine Joint Urgent Opinion of the Venice Commission and the Directorate General of Human Rights and Rule of Law (DGI) of the Council of Europe on the draft law amending provisions of the Code of Administrative Offences and the Criminal Code. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-PI(2021)010-e.
     Google Scholar
  46. Venice Commission. (2022). CDL-PI (2022)001-e Ukraine-Urgent Joint Opinion of the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR on the draft law on local referendum. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-PI(2022)001-e.
     Google Scholar
  47. Venice Commission. (2023). About us. Retrieved April 2023, from https://www.venice.coe.int/WebForms/pages/?p=02_about_us&lang=EN.
     Google Scholar
  48. Venice Commission. (2023). CDL-AD (2023)004-e Ukraine-Amicus curiae Brief relating to the procedure for appointing to office and dismissing the Director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau and the Director of the State Bureau of Investigation. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2023)004-e.
     Google Scholar
  49. Venice Commission. (2023). CDL-AD (2023)009-e Georgia-Interim opinion on the draft law on de-oligarchisation. European Commission for Democracy Through Law. Retrieved from https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2023)009-e.
     Google Scholar
  50. Warren, M. E. (2004). What Does Corruption Mean in a Democracy? American Journal of Political Science, 48: 328-343. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2004.00073.x.
     Google Scholar