Between the state and civil society: Anti-corruption discourse of movements and non-governmental organisations in Russia
| 21 lug 2021
INFORMAZIONI SU QUESTO ARTICOLO
Pubblicato online: 21 lug 2021
Pagine: 39 - 67
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/rsc-2019-0014
© 2019 Marina Makarova, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Main oppositions of anti-corruption discourse
| Type of the discourse | Positive self-presentation Negative presentation of others |
|---|---|
| Official discourse (APF) | Public activists acting on behalf Neglecting regional or local of the President officials |
| Patriotic movement Foreign agents (e.g. TI) | |
| Constructive, effective anti- Destructive, subversive activity (TI, corruption work AF) | |
| International discourse (TI) | Using internationally elaborated Limitation of international effective tools (anti-corruption organisations’ activity by the state “pill”) |
| Independence from the politics Politically oriented activity (APF, in anti-corruption work AF) | |
| Professionalism, scientific base Lack of hard evidence in of investigations investigations (AF) | |
| Hard day-to-day work with data Populism, unjustified heroism (AF) | |
| Protest discourse (AF) | Revealing truth about corruption Falsification of official information, among the high level authority restriction of social and protest activism (public authorities) |
| The bottom-up oppositional Stealing goods from citizens by movement on behalf of people corrupt officials and their inner that suffer from corruption circles | |
| Domestic donations from International (TI) or public supporters sponsoring (APF) | |
| Effective honest investigations Ineffective spending public money sparking public outcry for anti-corruption work, imitation of anti-corruption activity (APF) |
The results of content analysis (percentage from the total amount of cases)
| AF | TI | APF | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Representative of federal authorities | 56.4 | 20.8 | 1.1 |
| Representative of regional (local, municipal) authorities | 29.8 | 63.5 | 55.1 |
| Representative of public (municipal) enterprises | 8.5 | 18.8 | 38.9 |
| Individual(s) associated with authorities | 23.4 | 7.3 | 0.1 |
| Representative of business | 2.1 | 0 | 6 |
| Representative of NGOs | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Misappropriation of goods | 34 | 2.1 | 1.5 |
| Abuse of power | 2.1 | 10.4 | 0.4 |
| Bribery | 4.3 | 0 | 0 |
| Conflict of interest | 17 | 28.1 | 1.1 |
| Money laundering | 3.2 | 4.2 | 0 |
| Cartel, collusion | 22.3 | 13.5 | 8.7 |
| Embezzlement | 2.1 | 3.1 | 0 |
| Revolving doors | 4,3 | 15.6 | 0.4 |
| Proceeds concealment | 31.9 | 17.7 | 0.4 |
| Discrepancy between property and income | 17 | 3.1 | 0.4 |
| Irregularities in public procurement | 30.9 | 29.2 | 30.9 |
| Offshore manipulations | 8.5 | 7.3 | 0 |
| Expensive purchases in public procurement | 6.4 | 7.3 | 61.5 |
| Ineffective use of the state budget | 4.3 | 5.2 | 6.7 |
| Case filed | 7.5 | 5.2 | 3.8 |
| Party in fault convicted | 2.2 | 3.1 | 1.9 |
| No response | 8.6 | 8.3 | 3.8 |
| Agent deniesits involvement | 6.7 | 3.1 | 1.5 |
| Prosecution refused | 8.6 | 6.3 | 4.9 |
| The case is under official verification | 4.3 | 3.1 | 9.6 |
| Resignation | 2.2 | 7.3 | 0.4 |
| Recognition of misbehaviour | 6.5 | 16.7 | 32.1 |
| No information about consequences | 55.9 | 53.1 | 54 |
| Excellent | 3.2 | 12.5 | 22.3 |
| Positive | 18.1 | 16.7 | 18.5 |
| Not clear | 63.8 | 54.2 | 54.7 |
| Negative | 14.9 | 16.7 | 4.5 |
| Documents | 69.1 | 84.3 | - |
| Video from drone | 39.4 | 1.2 | - |
| Photo | 47.9 | 8.4 | - |
| Testimony | 2.1 | - | - |
| Social media materials | 9.6 | 3.6 | - |
| Media | 13.8 | 25.3 | - |
| Analytical materials | 13.8 | 43.4 | - |
Number of publications and their percentage in a year
| Year | AF | TI | APF | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 8 (8.5) | 7(7.3) | 15(5.7) | 30 (6.6) |
| 2017 | 30(31.9) | 56(58.3) | 70(26.4) | 156(34.3) |
| 2016 | 37(39.4) | 20(20.8) | 92(34.7) | 156(34.3) |
| 2015 | 19(20.2) | 13(13.5) | 88(33.2) | 145(31.9) |
| Total | 94(100) | 96(100) | 265(100) | 455(100) |
Strategies of anti-corruption discourse
| Strategy of discourse | Category | Official discourse (APF) | International discourse (TI) | Protest discourse (AF) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Referential | Causes of corruption | Actions of ‘negligent’ officials that spend public money under conditions of budget economy | Lack of the state’s political will, weak collaboration with international civil society in fighting against corruption | Corrupt political elites appropriating public goods |
| Legitimation | Values, principles of activity | Patriotism, efficiency, implementation of the national anti-corruption policy | Professionalism, political independence, using international ‘pills’ for fighting against corruption | Combating the corrupt authority, mobilisation for protest actions, public support |
| Topoi | Relations with the state in fighting against corruption | Collaboration, assistance by using administrative resources in working with local authorities | Attempts of dialogue, watchdog activity, supporting local activism, pressure from the state (foreign agent) | Confrontation, political opposition, unmasking corrupt officials |