The authors of the report note that it is practically impossible to assess corruption as a phenomenon using quantitative indicators; experts limit themselves to individual elements (for example, the number of investigations initiated), which do not give an idea of the real level of anti-corruption efforts. Therefore, the most popular tool for studying corruption is the use of indirect indicators based on surveys of citizens and experts. Such indicators, as a rule, assess the situation at the national level.

The best known to date are the Corruption Perception Index (Corruption perception index- CPI, compiled annually by Transparency International, and the International Governance Indicators (Worldwide Governance Indicators).Worldwide Governance Indicators- WGI) published by the World Bank (World BankThe former measures corruption in the public sector and the latter measures both public and private sector corruption.

As an alternative tool, indicators that assess corruption in the context of broader phenomena, such as public administration in general, can also be used. For example, the European Union has developed the European Public Administration Quality Index (EPI).European Quality of Government Index- TheEQI is based on WGI indicators combined with sub-national (regional) surveys and has been assessed only twice: in 2010 and 2013.

Various studies on the state of corruption in the EU countries show that, although many of them are among the least corrupt countries in the world (as a rule, Scandinavian countries), some show not the best results. And the results of surveys of citizens showed that more than half of respondents believe that the level of corruption in their countries has increased in recent years, less than a quarter - that anti-corruption measures are effective.

The disparity in survey results is also noticeable at the subnational level: in the same country, people in different regions have different assessments of the prevalence of corruption. However, there is a clear trend: in the least corrupt countries (as measured at the national level), regional indicators differ slightly, while in the most corrupt countries, the opposite is true.

The European Union does not have cross-national instruments aimed directly at combating corruption, but relevant measures are taken in the context of protecting the financial interests of the association of States. In particular, the EU has adopted the Convention on the Protection of the Financial Interests of the European Community (Convention on the Protection of the Financial Interests of the European Community).Convention on the Protection of the European Communities Communities' Financial Interest-PIF Convention) and theConvention on the Fight against Corruption involving Officials of the EuropeanCommunities or Officials of MemberStates of the European Union (Convention on the Fight against Corruption involving Officials of the European Communities or Officials of Member States of the European Union), both of which criminalize active and passive bribery. A separate body, the European Anti-Fraud Office (European Anti-Fraud Office), is the European Anti-Fraud Commission.European Anti-Fraud Office- OLAF) is established to detect fraud and corruption threatening the financial interests of the EU and is empowered to carry out administrative investigations and to inform the competent national authorities if, in its opinion, a criminal investigation needs to be initiated. In addition, the exchange of information and operational cooperation between national authorities is supported by Europol (European Police Office).European Police Office- Europol), Eurojust (European Union's Judicial Cooperation Unit - Eurojust) and the European Contact Network against Corruption (Eurojust).European contact-point network against corruption-EACN).

However, most of the anti-corruption activities in the EU are at the national (through rulemaking) and sub-national (usually in terms of enforcement) levels.

Bulgaria is one of the most corrupt countries in the EU (according to various studies), with a high level of decentralization, but without law-making powers for the regions.

Anti-corruption provisions are contained in various legal acts, including the Criminal Code, the laws on Civil Servants, on Prevention and Disclosure of Conflict of Interest, on Protection of Competition and Public Procurement, on Political Parties, as well as in certain strategic documents (anti-corruption strategy, five-year action plan for the prevention of corruption, program of priority measures to combat the main causes of corruption).

Penalties for corruption include imprisonment, fines and seizure of property, but financial penalties are rarely applied. The weak institutional framework and inefficiency of the judiciary, together with high levels of nepotism, abuse of office, and abuse of power among judges, hinder effective law enforcement in the country.

Croatians are also highly critical of the state of corruption in the country and the effectiveness of measures taken to combat it, largely due to the poor quality of public administration and the level of realization of the potential of the executive branch.

In addition to criminal law provisions, the country has adopted the Law on Prevention of Conflict of Interest in Public Institutions, the Law on Financing of Political Activities and Electoral Campaigns, the Code of Ethics for Civil Servants, the National Anti-Corruption Strategy for a five-year period, and a special anti-corruption body, the Office for Combating Corruption and Organized Crime, responsible for prosecuting relevant cases.

The low involvement of the authorities in the creation of anti-corruption mechanisms is partly compensated by the activity of civil society and non-profit organizations, whose projects are mainly related to ensuring openness and accessibility of information.

Finland, like other Scandinavian countries, has traditionally topped the rankings as the country with the lowest level of corruption.

However, the high degree of decentralization in the country makes public procurement one of the most corruption-prone areas, 52% of which is at the regional and local levels. The recent adoption of the Public Procurement and Concession Contracts Act (Laki julkisista hankinnoista ja käyttöoikeussopimuksista).

At the same time, the phenomenon of corruption itself is not perceived as widespread in the country, and prevention of corruption is mainly carried out through the development of ethical standards, transparency and control, for example, by enshrining the relevant norms in the Law on the Civil Service or publishing a manual "Values in Daily Work - Ethics of Civil Servants".

France is assessed by experts as having a moderate level of corruption.

The Penal Code criminalizes corruption offences such as active and passive bribery, including of foreign officials, influence peddling, extortion and embezzlement by officials, as well as corruption in the private sector. In 2016, France adopted the Law on Transparency, Fight against Corruption and Modernization of Economic Life, which introduced significant innovations in the country's fight against corruption, such as the use of deferred prosecution agreements, the establishment of a duty of

The country also has the High Office for Transparency in Public Life, which oversees the collection and publication of declarations of assets and interests of officials, and which, as of July 1, 2017, is also responsible for the lobbyist register.

In Germany, progress in the fight against corruption is rated from "good" to "very good".

As a federal country, the country is characterized by a certain degree of autonomy of the regions, including in anti-corruption issues. In addition, each region (federal state) of the country has its own police force. In such conditions, it is quite problematic to create a single anti-corruption body in Germany.

Anti-corruption at the national level is regulated primarily by the Criminal Code, the Anti-Corruption Act, the Act on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions and some others, as well as strategic documents of the Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection. In 2016, a separate Act on Combating Corruption in the Healthcare System was adopted, and in 2017, the Act on Strengthening Non-Financial Reporting by Companies on Position and Group Management, which provides for the obligation of companies to report non-financially on their position and group management, was adopted.

Anti-corruption initiatives at the subnational level include, for example, the Guidelines for the Prevention of Corruption in Public Procurement at the Local Level, developed jointly by the Association of Cities and Municipalities and the Federal Association of Small and Medium-sized Building Contractors for use by municipalities in tenders.

In Italy, corruption is perceived to be quite high by interviewees.

The Law on Combating Corruption was adopted in 2012 and the National Anti-Corruption Agency was established at the same time. The legislative decree "On the reorganization of the procedure for ensuring the necessary publicity, transparency and dissemination of information by public authorities" emphasizes the importance of openness in the prevention of corruption.

Corruption risks are highest in public procurement, which is supervised by the Coordination Committee for High Oversight of Infrastructure and Priority Works, in addition to the National Anti-Corruption Agency. Individual projects, such as the CAPACI Project, which monitors the financial flows of participants in public infrastructure, or the Itaca Project, also draw attention to the high level of corruption in procurement.

In Romania, corruption remains a serious problem, despite all the efforts made to develop anti-corruption policies and legislation.

The Law on the Prevention, Detection and Suppression of Corruption and the Law on the Declaration and Control of Assets of Officials, Judges, Civil Servants and Other Persons Holding Senior Positions, together with the provisions of the Criminal Code, are the basis of the national anti-corruption system. Since then, according to the authors of the report, more than 150 anti-corruption acts have been adopted in the country. Thus, Romania was the first European country to introduce legal provisions for the protection of whistleblowers and a system of declaration of assets, income and assets.

However, despite the developed regulatory framework, corruption in the country remains high, which experts attribute to the low quality of law enforcement and the fact that the adopted documents, often inconsistent and redundant, do not address the elements of corruption that really need to be regulated.

The UK is generally perceived as a country with a fairly low level of corruption.

The Bribery Act, widely known outside the country, defines four types of corruption offenses: active bribery, passive bribery, bribery of foreign officials, and failure of a commercial organization to prevent bribery. The development of whistleblower protection in the country, regulated through the application of the provisions of the Public Interest Disclosure Act, is commended, while the Criminal Finances Act 2017, introducing the concept of "wealth of unexplained pro