This article is also available in:
Русский (Russian) 
Uzbek
Recently, the Anti-Corruption Agency made a surprising announcement, revealing the results of an investigation that uncovered serious legal violations in the work of many ministries and government agencies. It turns out that several senior officials continue to engage in business activities, despite legal prohibitions. Specifically, in the ministries of construction, water resources, and agriculture, 398 senior officials were found to be founders of 449 business entities. In other ministries, the situation was equally alarming: in the ministries of transport, education, and culture, 107 senior officials were listed as founders of 116 companies.
How did this happen?
This raises questions. Why do such violations go unnoticed during the hiring process? The law clearly states that officials are prohibited from engaging in entrepreneurial activities. This is not only a direct violation of the law but also a clear indicator of corruption within the system.
It’s logical to ask: why aren’t thorough checks for commercial interests conducted when hiring candidates? Wouldn’t such procedures prevent people who intentionally violate the law from entering government structures? These cases highlight shortcomings in personnel policies and the oversight of public servants.
Digital security expert Shukhrat Kurbanov notes that existing technologies and data could be used to prevent such violations. He explains that there are databases, such as the Personal Identification Number (PINFL) and the registry of legal entity founders.
“What stopped them from launching a simple script to find matches in these databases?” Kurbanov asks.
According to him, if automation seems too complex, simpler methods could be employed, such as Excel and the VLOOKUP function, which could identify all matches within a day.
“In the end, a system could be created to check candidates when appointing them to government positions, or trigger an alert when opening or re-registering a legal entity – warning, official with business interests. Though maybe it’s not really needed?” Kurbanov added.
Why is the punishment so lenient?
What’s even more surprising is the response to the violations. Instead of dismissals and holding these individuals accountable, they are merely asked to resign from the companies they founded, and discussions are held with them. It seems as if intentional violations of the law are treated as simple mistakes.
This raises a critical question: if someone deliberately broke the law, fully aware of the ban on engaging in business, why are they simply “asked to exit” their business rather than facing more serious consequences? This sets a dangerous precedent of impunity, which only strengthens the corrupt atmosphere.
How to solve the problem?
To avoid such situations, several important measures need to be implemented:
- Thorough checks during hiring for government positions: Candidates should undergo strict screening for business interests or participation in commercial structures. This would prevent people trying to combine public service with entrepreneurship from entering the government sector.
- Regular monitoring of officials’ income and assets: A system must be established to track the income and assets of public servants to promptly identify legal violations.
- Strict penalties for breaking the law: Violators should not merely be removed from business structures. Strict measures, ranging from dismissal to legal prosecution for violating the law, should be applied.
- Transparency and public access to information: Information about officials and their assets should be made public, which would enhance oversight from society and reduce the likelihood of corrupt activities.
Without these measures, public service risks becoming a tool for personal enrichment, where laws are treated as mere formalities and violators face no consequences for their actions.
The text has been translated by AI. For more accurate information, please refer to the Russian version of the article