LEGAL DEFINITION OF PROPENSITY FOR CORRUPTION FACTOR OF NORMATIVE LEGAL ACT: LOGICAL AND JURIDICAL ANALYSIS

The article analyses the legislative definition of the propensity for corruption factor of the normative legal act. Method of determining the propensity for corruption factors through exhaustive listing used in the law is fraught with the fact that outside of the propensity for corruption factors there will be provisions of the regulatory legal acts that are not covered by the cases listed in the definition, but are in fact corrupt. The author defines outlines of the system of terms concerning the propensity for corruption in the legislation. He proposes the doctrinal definitions of such terms as the propensity for corruption in the legislation; the propensity for corruption in the normative legal act; legislation with the features of the propensity for corruption; normative legal act with the features of the propensity for corruption; the propensity for corruption factor of a normative legal act. In particular, according to the author, the propensity for corruption factor of a normative legal act (draft normative legal act) is the property of a normative legal act (draft normative legal act), which is expressed in the provision (set of provisions) of a normative legal act (draft normative legal act), and creates conditions for the illumination of corruption. The article proposes the new legislative definition of the propensity for corruption factor. The article considers the property of the propensity for corruption in the legislation. The propensity for corruption is an inevitable property of legislation, it is to a certain extent an inevitable evil. It is possible to recognize an acceptable (reasonable) propensity for corruption formed by the propensity for corruption provisions, which are required in the legislation to ensure the effectiveness of the legal regulation. It is impossible to eliminate completely the propensity for corruption in the legislation. The branches of legislation, which imply non-normative public law regulation, are the subject to propensity for corruption in a greater degree, while branches of legislation, which imply non-normative private law (including primarily contractual) regulation-in a lesser degree. The propensity for corruption is caused both by insufficient (deficient) and excessive legal regulation. The article appraises the importance of anti-corruption expert examination of the normative legal acts. It concludes on the overstate importance of anti-corruption expert examination of the normative legal acts as a measure of combating corruption. It is convenient to simulate the vigorous anti-corruption activities. However, anti-corruption expert examination of the normative legal acts should be provided and improved.