Evolution of the Concept of Political Corruption in Western and Russian Political Science and Law


Full Text:


As a result of intensive international debate and the adoption of a number of renowned international anticorruption conventions and initiatives in the 1990s and 2000s, the issue of corruption has become a convenient theme for different kinds of generalizations in social sciences. However, national legislation does not reflect these developments in its legal regulation due to conservatism inherent in jurisprudence. One of the most evident gaps in this respect is the sphere of political corruption. While political science and political economy for decades have been successful in explaining political processes in different countries as corrupt conspiracies of political elites, business structures, and other actors in the political process, legal science has kept itself separate from such problems and prefers to deal with individual acts of corruption. But if for criminal law such an approach seems logical due to the methodology of the criminal law, for other branches of law which set forth a systemic view on social processes – primarily administrative and constitutional – there seems to be an omission.

Nowadays, there is a quite favourable environment for the development of a consistent legal understanding of anticorruption in Russia. This has become possible thanks to current Russian administrative reforms, when the need for a highly professional bureaucracy led to a greater demand for various anticorruption mechanisms. The next possible step in Russia may be an attempt to ensure the effectiveness of well-proven anti-corruption methods of the political system as a whole.

In this article we propose a brief background to the evolution of the concept of political corruption in Western and Russian political and legal science, which entails the necessity of complex scientific legal synthesis on this issue, allows to discuss the existing methodological potential and creates new opportunities to build up appropriate systemic legislative models.

About the Authors

Stanislav Sheverdyaev
Lomonosov Moscow State University.
Russian Federation

Assistant Professor of Constitutional and Municipal Law, Law Faculty.

1 Leninskie Gory, Bldg. 13–14, GSP-1, Moscow, 119991.

Alina Shenfeldt
National Research University Higher School of Economics.
Russian Federation

Analyst at Laboratory for Anti-Corruption.

20 Myasnitskaya St., Moscow, 101000.


1. Amundsen I. Political Corruption: An Introduction to the Issues (Bergen: CMI, 1999).

2. Corruption and Democratisation (A. Doig & R. Theobald (eds.), London: Frank Cass, 2000). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315039602

3. Eisenstadt S.N. The Political Systems of Empires: The Rise and Fall of the Historical Bureaucratic Societies (New York; London: The Free Press of Glencoe; Collier Macmillan Ltd., 1963).

4. Eisenstadt S.N. Traditional Patrimonialism and Modern Neopatrimonialism (London: Sage, 1973).

5. Fjelde H. & Hegre H. Political Corruption and Institutional Stability, 49(3) Studies in Comparative International Development 267 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-014-9155-1

6. Heidenheimer A.J. Perspectives on Perception of Corruption in Political Corruption: Concepts and Contexts 141 (A.J. Heidenheimer & M. Johnston (eds.), 3rd ed., New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 2002). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315126647

7. Hellman D. Defining Corruption and Constitutionalizing Democracy, 111(8) Michigan Law Review 1385 (2012).

8. Helmke G. & Levitsky S. Informal Institutions and Comparative Politics: A Research Agenda, 2(4) Perspectives on Politics 725 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592704040472

9. Hope K.R., Sr. Corruption and Development in Africa in Corruption and Development in Africa: Lessons from Country Case Studies 17 (K.R. Hope, Sr. & B.C. Chikulo (eds.), New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000). https://doi.org/10.1057/9780333982440_2

10. Issacharoff I. On Political Corruption, 124(1) Harvard Law Review 118 (2010).

11. Issacharoff S. & Karlan P.S. The Hydraulics of Campaign Finance Reform, 77 Texas Law Review 1705 (1998).

12. Johnston M. The Search for Definitions: The Vitality of Politics and the Issue of Corruption, 48(149) International Social Science Journal 321 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2451.00035

13. Klitgaard R. Controlling Corruption (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988).

14. Koff S.P. Italy: From the First to the Second Republic (London: Routledge, 2000). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203005361

15. Kurer O. Definitions of Corruption in Routledge Handbook of Political Corruption 30 (P.M. Heywood (ed.), London: Routledge, 2015). https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315739175.ch2

16. Leff N.H. Economic Development Through Bureaucratic Corruption, 8(3) American Behavioral Scientist 8 (1964). https://doi.org/10.1177/000276426400800303

17. Manzetti L. & Wilson C.J. Why Do Corrupt Governments Maintain Public Support?, 40(8) Comparative Political Studies 949 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414005285759

18. Mungiu A. Corruption: Diagnosis and Treatment, 17(3) Journal of Democracy 86 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2006.0050

19. Nassmacher K.-H. Comparing Party and Campaign Finances in Western Democracies in Campaign and Party Finance in North America and Western Europe 233 (A.B. Gunlicks (ed.), Boulder: Westview Press, 1993).

20. Nyblade B. & Reed S.R. Who Cheats? Who Loots? Political Competition and Corruption in Japan, 1947–1993, 52(4) American Journal of Political Science 926 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00351.x

21. Olson M. Dictatorship, Democracy, and Development, 87(3) American Political Science Review 567 (1993). https://doi.org/10.2307/2938736

22. Olson M. Power and Prosperity: Outgrowing Communist and Capitalist Dictatorship (New York: Basic Books, 2000).

23. Philp M. The Definition of Political Corruption in Routledge Handbook of Political Corruption 17 (P.M. Heywood (ed.), London: Routledge, 2015). https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315739175

24. Pinto-Duschinsky M. Financing Politics: A Global View, 13(4) Journal of Democracy 69 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2002.0074

25. Robinson J.A. When Is a State Predatory?, CESifo Working Paper, No. 178 (1999).

26. Roniger L. Political Clientelism, Democracy, and Market Economy, 36(3) Comparative Politics 353 (2004). https://doi.org/10.2307/4150135

27. Rose-Ackerman S. Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences, and Reform (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139175098

28. Senturia J. Corruption, Political in Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Vol. 4 447 (E.R.A. Seligman (ed.), New York: Macmillan, 1931).

29. Shleifer A. & Vishny R.W. Corruption, 108(3) Quarterly Journal of Economics 599 (1993). https://doi.org/10.2307/2118402

30. Strauss D.A. Corruption, Equality, and Campaign Finance Reform, 94(4) Columbia Law Review 1369 (1994). https://doi.org/10.2307/1123287

31. Teachout Z. The Anti-Corruption Principle, 94(2) Cornell Law Review 341 (2009).

32. Thompson D.F. Ethics in Congress: From Individual to Institutional Corruption (Washington: Brookings Institution Press, 1995).

33. Warren M.E. The Meaning of Corruption in Democracies in Routledge Handbook of Political Corruption 42 (P.M. Heywood (ed.), London: Routledge, 2015). https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315739175.ch3

Supplementary files

For citation: Sheverdyaev S., Shenfeldt A. Evolution of the Concept of Political Corruption in Western and Russian Political Science and Law. Russian Law Journal. 2019;7(2):53-80. https://doi.org/10.17589/2309-8678-2019-7-2-53-80

Views: 128


  • There are currently no refbacks.

ISSN 2309-8678 (Print)
ISSN 2312-3605 (Online)