The experience of most European Union (EU) Member States has demonstrated effective anti-corruption practices, making the EU one of the leaders in this field, which can be used as an example to learn from in the field of anti-corruption. The purpose of this study is to analyze and identify the main features of anti-corruption legislation and strategies to prevent corruption at the national and supranational levels of the EU.
The following methods were used in the work: discourse and content analysis, method of system analysis, method of induction and deduction, historical-legal method, formal-legal method, comparative-legal method and others. Using the historical and legal method, the evolution of the formation of anti-corruption regulation at the supranational level was revealed. The comparative law method helped to compare the practices of the Member States of the EU in the field of anti-corruption regulation. The formal-legal method is used for generalization, classification and systematization of research results, as well as for the correct presentation of these results.
The main results, prospects for further research and the value of the material. The paper offers a critical review of key EU legal instruments on corruption, from the first initiatives taken in the mid-1990s to recent years.
In addition, the article analyzes the relevant anti-corruption legislation in the EU member states that are in the top 10 countries with the lowest level of corruption, namely: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany and Luxembourg.
Funding: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Availability of data and materials: Data will be available on request.
Melnyk, D.S., Parfylo, O.A., Butenko, O.V., Tykhonova, O.V. and Zarosylo, V.O. (2022), "Practice of the member states of the European Union in the field of anti-corruption regulation", Journal of Financial Crime, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 853-863. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-03-2021-0050
Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2021, Emerald Publishing Limited