Factors Defining Successful Police Reform: Cases Of

CEU eTD Collection

FACTORSDEFINING SUCCESSFUL POLICE REFORM: CASES OF In requirements fulfillmentof the partial Superv GEORGIAANDARMENIA Department ofPoliticalScience Central European University isor: Professor Lauraisor: Professor vonDaniels Budapest, Hungary Olga Sholderer Submitted to Submitted (2013) B

for Master thedegreeArt of of

CEU eTD Collection severity ofcorruption before thereform. and reform the of content actors, foreign of involvement them: among reform; police the elites the of change the by explained be could they as primary considered be not could but reform, police the of outcome the to contributed Armenia in movement failedbut Revolution, Rose Georgiathe placein during took which elite of change a is reform police undertaken the of outcome the defined which factor primary the that is conclusion main The studies. academic as well as reports, external documents, successful more is reform police the reform, police undertaken the which I society. the of security the to crucial the of one being corruption,

shared hs td i ddctd o h css f oie eom ie a eiiain of elimination at aimed reform police of cases the to dedicated is study This similar problems with corruption in the past but past the in corruption with problems similar ad eain wt te oes f h reforms the of losers the with relations and , -

Georgia and and Georgia in Georgia in

Abstract Armenia. T Armenia. i

a than in Armenia. It includes analysis of of analysis includes It Armenia. in than nd lack of constraints posed by the losers of losers the by posed constraints of lack nd

he study answers the question the answers study he show

to do so in a revolutionarya soin do to

different outcomes different cnies w cases, two considers t . Other factors also also factors Other .

legal legal after why the

CEU eTD Collection same the be never without them. would here time My talks. fun our with me supported and thesis, this writing not my would best. thesis This do to me motivate to and us, between miles of thousands are there when even time difficult whole MAprogram. during encouragement their for gratitude my expressing for enough advice times. in the even busiest a would I possible. be endless patience am hns o y red Hzl Jsp ad ai who Hani, and Josipa Hazal, friends my to thanks Warm am I not are Words side. my by being and me supporting for parents my to thankful am I I I my thesisto dedicate this whole heartedly thank thank heartedly whole

also grateful also , support and words of motivation. Without her guidance this thesis wouldnot guidance thesis her this Without motivation. of and words , support

lso like to thank Professor Attila Folsz for his contributions and kind and contributions his for Folsz Attila Professor thank to like lso

my boyfriend,my be finishedhisloveandwithout support.

to my thesis supervisor, Professor Laura von Daniels for her her for Daniels von Laura Professor supervisor, thesis my to Acknowledgements mom, dad,mom, João ii

and , for his ability to make me smile in the most the in smile me make abilityto his for , my boyfrien my

d et y od pitd during uplifted mood my kept

João w riting this this riting

inspire meat all times. who believemeand in

thesis and thesis the

CEU eTD Collection 6. 5. 4. 3.3. 3.2. 3.1. GEORGIA 3. 2.2. 2.1. 2. 1.4. 1.3. 1.2. 1.1. 1.

MAIN THEORETICAL APPROACHES AND METHODOLOGY INT BIBLIOGRAPHY LIST APPENDIX CONCLUSION 3.3.2. 3.3.1. 3.2.2. 3.2.1. 3.1.4. 3.1.3. 3.1.2. 3.1.1. EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS: FACTORS DEFINING SUCCESS OF THE POLICEREFORM IN ARMENIA AND Change of the Content of the Introduction into the Cases and Methodology Theoretical A Structure selectionCase and Research Brief Other Possible Explanations RODUCTIO

......

L iterature Severity Involvement Armenia Georgia PoliceReform in Armenia Georgia: WhatWas in the Package? PoliceRe Armenia and Georgia in the90

...... Q of theof Study a

...... uestion and the N pproaches

...... E R

...... lite O

Of Corruption ...... form’s Outcomes in Armenia and Georgia eforms

verview ......

M ...... Of Foreign Actors ethodology ......

......

nd ......

...... t V heFindings

...... ariables

......

...... Contents

......

- ...... s

......

...... iii

......

23 19 12 47 40

... 8 6 6 3 ....

51 48 45 42 35 30 25 23 .. 61 57 52 23 11

CEU eTD Collection Figure structure………………………………………………. Georgia 6(A). Police Table Table 6(A).Action for Plan Anti Figure Caucasus………………………………….. tothe South 4.2.U.S.Assistance Margaryan 2000to2007)……………………………………………... (served from Table key 4.1.2. Heads ofthe Armenian (appointed February 2004)………………………………………………………….. Table key 4.1.1. Heads ofthe Georgian after ministries theRoseRevolution Table 3.4(A) Anti Major Table 3.3(B) PoliceActivities by Reform gover theGeorgian Table 3.3(A) Anti Major 2006.... Figure of from state post 3.2(B)capacity Comparison scores Figure PerceptionIndex inArmenia Corruption 3.2(A) and Georgia in1999 Table 2.1(B) MostSimilar Analysis withTwoCases………………………………. Table 2. FigureGeorgia and 2.1.Armenia map…………………………………......

6 (B) Police Reform Programfor6 (B) Police Reform 2010 ...... 1 (A) Freedom House Freedom Georgia(A)scores Armeniaand House in1998 of - - corruption corruption - Corruption Strategy Georgia…………………. of Tables Tables and Figures Programs Programs

ministries under prime ministries - 2011………………………………… iv in Armenia……………………….. in Georgia………………………… in

- nment………………. communist year communist to - minister Andranikminister - 20 04...... - 2011…

60 5 5 49 4 4 3 3 30 2 2 22 21 1 8 7 6 3 5 4 8 6 9

CEU eTD Collection reform affec most the as perceived opinion public in that demonstrates 2011) International, (Transparency index International Transparency results. significant bring not does reform beginning the since 2012). (OCCRP, cycle”virtuous a into turnedbe reforms, can appropriatedecisive and with and, brokenbecan World country of feature a is it when International Transparency As examples. anti of part others. Europe, of Council UN, as organizations such of agenda the on public the benefit to intended regulations safety and health avoid to bribes pay that individuals and firms by caused damage the and programs for funds of theft outright and diversion the include corruption of forms devastating efficiency since the

Bank writes: “Georgia’sexperienceBankwrites: in Armenia is in Armenia

All around the world countries have been fighting with corruption and only a small small a only and corruption with fighting been have countries world the around All hc rahd sgiiat rges n ihig corruption fighting in progress significant a reached which The

early 1990 early

f h companies the of - orpin rgas succeeded. programs corruption

question of corruption of question

On the other hand, anti hand, other the On

- of the 2000 the of

s. less successful than inGeorgia. C the the orruption ted by corruption. This study This corruption. by ted police we te bcm seilzd n bribe in specialized become they when , - s 1. , and one of the steps was steps the of one and , wih r spoe t b gadas f h society. the of guardians be to supposed are which , can

has been on the agenda of such organizations as UNDP as organizations such of agenda the on been has INT distort distort - RODUCTIO corruption efforts were also were efforts corruption (201 shows that the vicious cycle endemiccorruption vicious of the that shows

igpr ad awn r aog h famous the among are Taiwan and Singapore operation of public service and can also reduce reduce also can and service public of operation 1 0

” (Svensson, 2005:19) (Svensson, ” )

notes it, c it, notes

N the int

orruption is especially dangerous dangerous especially is orruption

ends police reform. Nevertheless, the Nevertheless, reform. police police is among the institution the among is police

to discover why the police the why discover to

SE OC ad many and OECD OSCE,

been

Fighting n police in - giving.

taken in Armenia in taken

corruption is corruption

s Georgia. is “The most most “The

public public One s

CEU eTD Collection reforms ledtodifferent outcomes. polic the of framework the 2010). (OSCE, and rebranding equipment, t of Parliament salaries the (2005), Novosti RIA Affairs. Internal itself, police the of rebranding and equipment police 2004. in Saakashvili Mikhail of government be inferredcases toother only reformssimilarcountries ofpolice in Georgia and Armenia in sector this in only made progress and factors. defining its to study this in given attention deserves improvement the of progress and pace the nevertheless, only b can Saakashvili by eradicated completely reforms the that claim not Geor in reforms answer study This successful. considered be can actions their of some only nevertheless, sector, security the improving in attempts made have states Caucasian cons is It countries. Soviet relative –

from rules on public procurement, increase of salaries of the officers, renewal of the of renewal officers, the of salaries of increase procurement, public on rules from h efrs n ihig orpin tre tkn place taking started corruption fighting in efforts The P oli ce reform has become one of the of one become has reform ce ad hr ae oe tp t b tkn o nrae h lvl f ulc service, public of level the increase to taken be to steps more are there and , The similarities between the two countries, as well as in the actions taken in taken actions the in as well as countries, two the between similarities The

h gia have achieved more success in fighting corruption in in corruption fighting in success more achieved have gia Similar moves were also were moves Similar Rpbi o Armenia of Republic e e called corruption called e

The study touches upon only police only upon touches study The raising awareness among the citizens about the undergoing reform undergoing the about citizens the among awareness raising drd o e o be to idered rfr mk i epcal itrsig o netgt wy the why investigate to interesting especially it make reform e

improved - free. taken e f h mi ses towards steps main the of ne nld atos ie a mdriain f the of modernization at aimed actions include

The reforms touched upon different issues of the of issues different upon touched reforms The 2 It is unarguable that the success can can success the that unarguable is It

, while the legal documents issued by the the by issued documents legal the while ,

most important issues on the agenda of post of agenda the on issues important most

as well as restructuring the Ministry of the the of Ministry the restructuring as well as

by it ; nor ; the Armenian government. According to According government. Armenian does it argue it does

reform and considers only changes only considers and reform , therefore, the conclusions can can conclusions the therefore, , .

n eri wt a new a with Georgia in

that the regime created regime the that s the question the s

the development. All All development. police. It police. be called be why the why does -

CEU eTD Collection reform the of parts such list (2007) Steves and Rousso example, For to. respond should protection) and drugs trafficking of kinds other and business for term a as used and “roofing”, means originally which word officers police of involvement levels, different on (Wade corruption” in “specialized sector public a having as study. this in chosen corruption, eliminating at directed clearly were reforms the that fact the to and this, to due Therefore, help. for apply to police to trust enough have not did population st are reports various exist, of statistics such Though number cases. cleared of the number a or as crimes, registered ones such suggest (2002) Sun Georgia, and Armenia in reform police Transparency by corruption of Index levels International’s the to according interests, personal in power the abuses it practice in but 2013), (INTERPOL, interests” legal and freedom rights, their people, quali the on conclusions make can one Schnek, and (Jobson goals” desired 1982 to relative performance actual of quantity and/or eff and organizations, of evaluation the for criteria 20). (2005: gain” private for office public of misuse “the Svensson: by one as taken be will study this in used corruption objectives major the of one was :28 tn ta te aa n eri bfr te eom a nt elcig h raiy as reality, the reflecting not was reform the before Georgia in data the that ating ). The literature onanti c Lower Even though this study is not about the notion of effectiveness, using this concept, this using effectiveness, of notion the about not is study this though Even orruption is used in this paper as an indicator of the successful outcome as it as outcome successful the of indicator an as paper this in used is orruption

The pre The T, 2012). (TI,

- The school of organization effectiveness says that “goals set the set “goals that says effectiveness organization of school The - reform situation in both Georgia and Georgia both in situation reform corruption reforms severalcorruption introduces . 1.1.

hr cud e sd ifrn idctr fr sesn the assessing for indicators different used be could There f the of

Brief literature overviewBrief ty of police, if among its goals are “protection of of “protection are goals its among if police, of ty

mlmnain of implementation 3

in criminal acts, acts, criminal in ciees s qae with equated is ectiveness ,

1982)

h reforms. the

Armenia due to due criteria, which the reformcriteria, which kryshevaniye widespread such indicator was indicator such

can be described described be can T e ocp of concept he

h quality the (a Russian Russian (a

bribing CEU eTD Collection to addition In USAID. and (OSCE) Europe in Cooperation and Security for Organization the (EC), theEuropeanRevolution: Commission Rose reform after the providingadvice onpolice W the from support was Georgia in reforms the governmentare important. ofthe andthe reform losers so Thi reformers. the restricting are who bureaucrats be can there renewed still be can government the though even that ignore authors the nevertheless, elite, the of unity the to due was success the Georgia t or promotion receive to order in positions kick paying in need a still is there Georgia, unlikely Russia, in third, And police. the by over taken is place their argue, O’Shea and Kakachia as but defeated, been t in criminality the of level the to comparing crime, organized Second, leadership” state and police the within elements corrupt by run still is MVD) (the ministry interior the because increases recent despite continue well may and increases wage survived has “predation where Russia, to comparing results, better far reached reformers Georgian police the by provided services public in decentralization pr and recruiting in barriers the and criminals by to connections taken behavior, were state predatory which eliminating measures in reformers the to connected is Georgia and Russia in reforms O’Shea and Kakachia Soviet reform and Armenia in Georgia. evaluat for basis a as served criteria with These cooperation GRECO. and laws several it, to plan action and plan strategy national as process

ein and region, Di Puppo (2010) also argues that one of the major reasons of the success of the the of success the of reasons major the of one that argues also (2010) Puppo Di i difference the on studies several are There mto o plc ofcr. is, hog te rsi rs i te salaries, the in rise drastic the through First, officers. police of omotion s thesis does consider this dimension and explains why relations between relations why explains and dimension this consider does thesis s n of one (2012) argue that difference between the outcomes of the police police the of outcomes the between difference that argue (2012)

h cniee css s R is cases considered the

o enter the public service. public the enter o est: “Three donor organizations were involved in involved were organizations donor “Three est: 4

anti n ion and exploring the content of the the of content the exploring and ion si i cmaio wt Georgia with comparison in ussia

Kkci ad ’ha 2012:18 O’Shea, and (Kakachia

- orpin eom i te post the in reforms corruption They also argue that in that argue also They - he 90 he backs to the superior superior the to backs - s in Russia, has has Russia, in s ) - . .

CEU eTD Collection by restricted be can they reformers, the of characteristics personal of despite that fact the ignores it Nevertheless, Western government. new and the age of education the on focuses and Revolution Rose the of importance the to out point reform. the from losers the with relations and interests its considering view, of point different a from but elites, the on focuses oppositio the and political the Georgia in and consolidated were they Armenia in while separated, were elites economic that argues She elites. economic and political of structure d Armenia in reform police that Nagorno consideration into case toGeorgia. comparison coherentmore a makes and reforms police only investigates and reforms the of area broad less on focuses study this while Ukraine, of anti on study case a makes Nasuti succes their defines which factor the not reforms, the of achievement determinant be Georgia Armeniaand in reform police the of outcomes the to contributedthoughrole, majorplay a not 2004”. in 500,000 foreign of involvement USD with Academy Police the of meanwhile, reform States, supported United The Affairs. Internal of Ministry the assist to advisors expert p democratic the sponsoring successful or not or successful .

Shahnazarian Nasuti Peter . n to form and to stand against the old regime. old the against stand to and form to n oee, i However,

(

2012 (2012) makes a brief memo on the same research question and includes and same research onthequestion memo makesabrief (2012) case of Georgia of case actors is discussed in Chapter 4, nevertheless, it is argued that it did it that argued is it nevertheless, 4, Chapter in discussed is actors opst, t opposite, n ) - olicing conference, the EC together with the OSCE has provided has OSCE the with together EC the conference, olicing Karabakh, apart from Georgia and Armenia. Her conclusion is is conclusion Her Armenia. and Georgia from apart Karabakh, focuses

id not have the same success as it did in Georgia due to the to due Georgia in did it as success same the have not id In general, the literature on the anti the on literature the general, In - corruption reforms and makes a comparison with the case case the with comparison a makes and reforms corruption

on the factors which factors the on . He makes a suggestion that state c state that suggestion a makes He . i study his 5

ugss ht ihr tt cpct i an is capacity state higher that suggests with Armenia, which is a more similar more a is whichArmenia, with determine whether the reforms w reforms the whether determine the losers of the reform, who can can who reform, the of losers the This study’s main argument also also argument main study’s This - corrup fl implementation. sful apacity can be such such be can apacity tion reforms does reforms tion it did not allow allow not did it The factor of of factor The ill CEU eTD Collection problemthe solve should whichways, similar take should corruption past, historical shared to with problems similar shared countries both because chosen academic s d governmental re the of Georgia in Revolution of and operationalized PerceptionIndex by TI). and domestic both bot institutions, in international various by evaluations expert through operationalized consequently, withthereform theirlosers relations ofthe Georgia in reforms the of Georgia. in than successful gapthis applies onlosers andpartial andtheories ofthe problem. reforms this to filling at aims study this Therefore, implementation. reform from government the constrain This are there variables controlling the Among variable Independent variable dependent The Th form tudies. e research question of this paper is why the police reform in Armenia Armenia in reform police the why is paper this of question research e

s is

and severity of corruption before the reforms the before corruption of severity and

cmns poet ofca dcmns f novd Gs rprs and reports NGOs, involved of documents official projects ocuments, cmaaie td o to cases: two of study comparative a through

h Armenia and Georgia, and public opinion indices (Such as Corruption as (Such indices opinion public and Georgia, and Armenia h

1.2.

various academic studies evaluating the events of the Rose Rose the of events the evaluating studies academic various

1.3.

The n lc o sces n Armenia in success of lack and

Research question question Research and the variables attempt for a Revolution

Case Case selection s a is hypothesis of the research is that is research the of hypothesis is

ucs/ak f ucs o te oie reform police the of success of success/lack hnelc o cag o te elites, the of change of change/lack 6

and methodologyand

involvement Armenia

in Armenia. .

corruption

, which ,

s a is and Georgia. The cases were were cases The Georgia. and

of foreign actors foreign of the major the

hne f h elites the of change

will be analyzed using using analyzed be will

in the police the in

reason for succes for reason hc wl be will which

and and I wl be will It . and due due and content is

and less s , CEU eTD Collection variable st though 118). 2003: (Geddes, outcome” the in trendgeneral the explain nevertheless that but study under time the during noticeably very not and slowly whil factors these on focusing into the if tricked be way will [researcher] Either<…> he a range dependent considerable spans variable even interest, of outcomes the of causes true the of some constant near or constant same the of points time several choosing argues, (2003) includingInternational Transparency andWorldBankindicators. eva the For process. reform police the of Council the as such InEurope. vario addition, organizations, international the to given is attention special and corruption, and the by reports police includes also on analysis The committees etc. parliament, special its governments, the by issued process, persuasive of one and direction, right a to variable policyfor characteristics recommendationscountries similar with as majo the to contribute would paper is level its what and is corruption what perceiving in differences cultural of

Scocpol’s study and argues that “examination of contrasting cases is a solid step in step solid a is cases contrasting of “examination that argues and study Scocpol’s , )

Of course this research design may contain several pitfalls. For example, as Geddes as example, For pitfalls. several contain may design research this course Of reform the of parts were which documents, legal of analysis of consists research The of thedependentends both fromchoosing cases includes researchwhich This design,

is described by B by described is can be, indeed, considered as a limitation. It is partially solved by choosing similar similar choosing by solved partially is It limitation. a as considered indeed, be, can eghnn te ruet y hoig ae a te poie ie o dependent of sides opposite the at cases choosing by argument the rengthening ” (Geddes: 2003. 107 (Geddes: 2003. ” u arbara Geddes (2003) as the one of the pe the of one the as (2003) Geddes arbara s

academic papers are used for analyzing the activities madeacademicused for during are analyzing theactivities papers

h raos ht cco’ suy a be cniee so considered been has study Scocpol’s that reasons the - 108). e giving short shrift to causal factors that may be changing be may that factors causal to shrift short giving e dbt o hw o ih cruto ad ol suggest would and corruption fight to how on debate r

uto o te orpin aiu idcs r used, are indices various corruption the of luation 7

Selection on the dependent variable (even variabledependent the on Selection case can “have the effect of holding holding of effect the “have can case

non -

oenetl organizations, governmental Armenia rsuasive ones. She refers refers She ones. rsuasive

and Georgia a well as , . The The . .

the the

CEU eTD Collection in goes then loca example. geographical as variables, predetermined some as such factors, eliminate also This implementation. reform different the reached in outcomes years some after nevertheless, but, challenges, and problems same the allow time in point second This s. time of point second the in Georgia and Armenia corruptio corruption of GeorgiaArmeniaand in study this for chosen framework the selected. cases the introduces case Armenian in success of lack and Georgia in reform police the of success affectenvironment, whichcan the outcome each because whi countries, the to only but reform, police of kind any for explanations generalizable propose 129). cannot study 2003: this of (Geddes, conclusions the propose” Therefore, they theories the test cannot they however, themselves, and theories the propose can it as well, as phenomena, considered selecti Armenia. and Georgia as characteristics similar with inferring countries as well as variables, many for controlling cases, dimensions various in on on the dependent variable can be a tool for finding plausible explanations for the the for explanations plausible finding for tool a be can variable dependent the on on h suy first, study, The . t includes It n. The

n nlss f h plc rfr udrae i Amna n Georgia. and Armenia in undertaken reform police the of analysis an case of police reform can be happening in particular historical and cultural cultural and historical particular in happening be can reform police of case The section is scin n h cnet f h reform the of content the on section first

1.4. lo oprs h lvl f orpin ece atr h rfrs and reforms the after reached corruption of level the compares also of comparison : content of the reform, change of the elite, foreign actors and severity severity andactors foreignelite, the of reform,change the of content : define

Structure The third The s s

demonstrating that both countries were similar were countries both that demonstrating ht ol b pos be could what , the most important for the success of the police reform police the of success the for important most the ,

h lvl n tp o te orpin n h plc of police the in corruption the of type and level the

ofstudy the chapter discusses the factors which are, according to according are, which factors the discusses chapter .

–

before the reforms, namely during the 90 the during namely reforms, the before ch are similar to Georgia and Armenia, Armenia, and Georgia to similar are ch

and the findings and il tertcl xlntos f the of explanations theoretical sible

s s eiae t te oie and police the to dedicated is

aiu psil explanatory possible various s eds 20) us it, puts (2003) Geddes As

ute tsig bt “by but testing, further tion or culture, for for culture, or tion

and shared and s el as well as

ny to only Next - CEU eTD Collection Revolution the of results the by determined was Georgia and Armenia in corruption reducing of thereforms. whic issues the on discussion the of part a as chapter last the in analyzed be will factors other The extent. smaller a in highlighted been have others the from borrowed the of structure The significant. also are factors other the reforms, the of success the defining in important most the as emphasized is Geor and Armenia in reform police of cases different in success of lack and success the of explanation broad the is This influence. losers’ avoid and reform the implement to managed and politics I corrupt. were and as well therefore, and, schemes, corruption through reforms that is argument main The power. to came Saakashvili as such politicians, elected and bureaucrats appointed newly the as easier became implementation reform police the and Revolution Rose have elites the Georgia In cases. Armenian and Georgian the to applied are motivations. their complicates which playfields various in games different playing are politicians The framework. theory choice role of indefining theoutcome police reform. of which define and explanations other discuss subsections

o cnetd e t te l elites old the to yet connected not in Georgia, unlikely Armenia, unlikely Georgia, in dismiss old officers, the losers from the from losers the officers, old dismiss h mi cnlsos f hs td i ta te ucm o te oie eom in reform police the of outcome the that is study this of conclusions main The rational into falls reform the of outcomes different the of explanation general The gia. The elite explanation will be supported later on in the study, and even though it it though even and study, the in on later supported be will explanation elite The

n ree (1991) Frieden

hs way this te lt ws nuae fo te nlec o te l inner old the of influence the from insulated was elite the , elite new the as But w But

hr i a epai o oe motn fco, while factor, important one on emphasis an is there n ae o ivle i vros “games” various in involved not are and ruet ocrig h possible the concerning argument hen 9

reform, who had ties with the organized crime crime organized the with ties had who reform, a

was politician is a newbie in the field and field the in newbie a is politician h were the most defining for the success success the for defining most the were h were

able not tied down to the losers of the the of losers the to down tied not able

able to able them played the most important most the played them implement the reforms as reforms the implement

changed during the the during changed

explanations . It can be be can It

they

is , CEU eTD Collection s Azerbaijan. as Arme to similar cases the on tested further be can which explanation, an arg main the to inferior are but important though are package Other reform. police the of framework e the in measures similar very applying though reforms, the form losers the of influence the avoid not could and schemes corruptions old t of failure to due change not did In which team, process. old the sacking from were the reformers the opposite, eased in Armenia, and police, in levels corruption decreasing in reformers officers police the and bureaucrats corrupt recrui themselves), (the reform the from losers the eliminate effectively to able was therefore, and, schemes corruption old the in involved not was which 2003 in movement paain, such xplanations, he attempt of the Revolution. Therefore, the government was still involved in the in involved still was government the Therefore, Revolution. the of attempt he - ig e oe. h lc o cnetos ih h od lt hle the helped elite old the with connections of lack The ones. new ting as 04 I Geo In 2004. novmn o te oeg actors foreign the of involvement rgia, the Rose Revolution brought the change of the elite elite the of change the brought Revolution Rose the rgia, 10

svrt o crisis of severity , ument . The conclusions propose conclusions The . nia and Georgia, such such Georgia, and nia

n the and reform ’s

CEU eTD Collection reforms. police successful behind stand that factors causal potential identifying of aim the casesArmeniaand Georgia,indetail other ofwhich bein chapters. will discussed t at explana theoretical Brief reforms. beforecorruption the of severity and actors foreign implementation),or involvement of partial explan alternative The above. discussed break and elite the of change the to due possible is countries considered two the in reform police successful the that is study this of argument main the Nevertheless, study. the of point some at problem considered the to applied are approaches reform distort explains which approach an is last the And support. politica people. new recruiting with difficulty and reforms the of losers the from pressure losses, political means it of costs the on emphasis part. empirical the in study by politicians implemented. was study the which of lenses the improving at aimed study this

h describing from theoretical point of view the issues, which will be tested afterwards in the the in afterwards tested be will which issues, the view of point theoretical from describing e end of this chapter. this of end e 2.

isaiiy h rul the instability l MAINTHEORETICAL APPROACHES . It . are First, t First,

Secondly,

Second introduces the notion of notion the introduces -

implementation process and are interested in keeping the status quo. status the keeping in interested are and process implementation considered as rational actors rational as considered his chapter aims at presenting major notions which are going to be used in used be to going are which notions major presenting at aims chapter his it

. It also It .

s h approach the is it presents the two cases that will be analyzed in the next chapter with chapter next the in analyzed be will that cases two the presents it

the After each theoretical approach there are also brief references to the to references brief also are there approach theoretical each After r’ an ol s o ean in remain to is goal main ers’

refor h frt prah o xliig ucsfl oie eom puts reform police successful explaining to approach first The presents m tion for each of these alternative explanations will be placed be will explanations alternative these of each for tion

implementation

which which the major framework of rational choice rational of framework major the a ations of the study are the content of the reform (full reform the of content the are study the of ations state capacity and argues that the police reform police the that argues and capacity state , who seek who , argues 11

Therefore, in this study t study this in Therefore, . High costs can restrict reformers becausereformers restrictcan Highcosts .

ht n h sae after states the in that

their in their the ANDMETHODOLOGY rsne f h lsr wih can which losers the of presence office and to gain wide public public wide gain to and office terests. The chapter then follows follows then chapter The terests. with the losers of the reform, reform, the of losers the with he bureaucrats and bureaucrats he pro of period a

theory

All of the the of All , through ,

high was

CEU eTD Collection individuals natural reform are actors the in interests their of process. implementation out acting are who individuals rational benefits. own seeks and i individual the that means which 23), 1965: Buchanan, and (Tullock process” collective a in power “maximizing as individual an of objectives the define (1965) Buchanan analysis. this in priority a sense makes It theory. (Geddes,TaiwanBrazil 2000), (Wu, 1994). alone governments efficiency. organizational state capacityas be can the and reform amove considered and toimprove Armenia Georgia in (Tay personnel” own its by decisions its of implementation building. and capacity state the increasing towards description withpolice onthesituation and corruption. the following involved, were Georgia and Armenia which in conflicts similar describes then situations. analogous in had which countries two are co Armen and Georgia rruption, as well as similar conflicts over the territories the over conflicts similar as well as rruption, The State capacity can be defined as “the ability of a state to ensure the reliable reliable the ensure to state a of ability “the as defined be can capacity State The reforms which took place in Georgia and Armenia can be c be can Armenia and Georgia in place took which reforms The question of question the wie te fcos remained factors other while , ia are countries which share which countries are ia choices made by government by made choices It includes It Therefore in this study, politicians and bureaucrats are considered as considered are bureaucrats and politicians study, this in Therefore codn o odn(92,“hs m “this (1982), Goodin to According why hr hv be vros exa various been have There

a — this happens this very similar and comparable past and before the reforms were reforms the before and past comparable and similar very

2.1. politicians, bureaucrats, voters, bankers, etc. etc. bankers, voters, bureaucrats, politicians,

general description of why these c these why of description general Within the framework of of framework the Within

Theoretical approachesTheoretical

can be answered with the help of rational choice rational of help the with answered be can are 12

common problems related to the police and police the to related problems common n xml o a attempt an of example an

members and the public officers public the and members prxmtl te ae fr example, for same, the approximately

with neighboring countries. The countries. neighboring with pe o a hne brought change a of mples lor, 2011: 16). 16). 2011: lor, odel emphasizes that the real the that emphasizes odel choice, rational

ases are comparable and comparable are ases onsidered as a step step a as onsidered hn h police the Then s self s — at -

making and and making

ulc and Tullock and that the the that and institutional - in a broad broad a in interested by by se se in

CEU eTD Collection and Armenia of cases the to important so is explanation elite the why clarify to necessary support. popular as well as elections/revolution, recent to due credibility more have they as reforms, reform. the of losers the with relations stud this of argument act an in analogous way. would individuals the that sure make to theory, this to according second, and, geography, as firs allows study this for cases analogous choosing Therefore, notes 1990). (Tsebelis, benefit most the them brings which playing are they arenas multiple the all in conditions the account and, order preference own their make they it, of ground the On incomplete. is it if even them, to available made is which information the of basis the on decisions their make bureaucrats event decision collective and government a within relations the of individuals” these of choices the aggregateof the analyzedas be must nations or governments as such collectivities of 'choices' , allows generalizing theindividuals s

occurring After setting setting After same. the act conditions similar in people argues, himself Riker as Nevertheless, that grapple to individuals argued these circumstances” with 1990:175). (Riker, have othersbe to are actions intentional actors’ from example, another As outcomes the Hence, circumstances. concrete in rooted arenecessarily intentions believers?). of community t which within to are decisions and actions of meanings the hence individualsand to and unique are intentions that insisted have critics social “Many hy r as ls ifune b te nenl osrit. oee, i However, constraints. internal the by influenced less also are They and politicians involved in the reforms. the in involved politicians and

in Armenia and Georgia in a lower level, studying the relations between the between relations the studying level, lower a in Georgia and Armenia in

not the major theoretical framework, it is possible to return to the main main the to return to possible is it framework, theoretical major the

, aey te hne f h eie n, osqety bek from break consequently, and, elite the of change the namely, y, the subject to generaliz to subject the hey occur occur hey

(Goodin, 1982: 24). As the theory considers the whole scope whole the considers theory the As 24). 1982: (Goodin, –

(what meaning can a witch’s curse have outside the outside have curse witch’s a can meaning (what ’

intentions: e eie ae oe rn t ipeetn full implementing to prone more are elites New 13 ation. For example, some have argued that argued have some example, For ation.

understood only in terms the efforts of efforts the terms in only understood

According to this approach, individuals individuals approach, this to According

Rational choi Rational be be found only in specific culture culture specific in only found - t, control for various variables various for control t, making, it allows considering considering allows it making, in ce theory, as Riker (1990) Riker as theory, ce , taking the best decision best the taking ,

taking into into taking t is first, first, is t CEU eTD Collection a Ministry Finance the by blocked was however, reform, attempted Each promotion. and recruitment in 40 th improve to order in service civil the of reforms were there Brazil In (1994). Geddes by perfectly described of was insulation lack the of example An reforms. partial the of winners or losers existing to due be can insulatio political and vacuum institutional by caused groups. interest the of influence and insulation of question the and Georgia. ex to relevant especially is explanation elite Therefore, to only areas Soviet elit post post be and identity consciousness, collective the exclusively, not albeit also, but system political the holders aggregates key position of being than to rather (4) all, patterns; behavioral above and back, commitments structures, traced elite in be differences can systems political between differences of sources the “ countries: K as and, changes the for force driving a are role major a in elites the that is them among point post in elites the on studies various been have There Georgia. opczyński havior of the masses”(K the of havior - . hs ‘ii scey, n the in society’, ‘civil Thus, e. s. “Each of these proposals advocating reducing but not eliminating, the role of patronage of role the eliminating, not but reducing advocating proposals these of “Each s. - - Soviet societies are still too dependent upon (and dependenttooupon still aresocieties Soviet the by driven are decisions major states Soviet do Cnrs. oiiin wr acsoe t uig ueurtc os s a as jobs bureaucratic using to accustomed were Politicians Congress. nd/or To provide theoretical background for the elite argument, it is necessary to turn to turn to necessary is it argument, elite the for background theoretical provide To

(1) elites are universal; (2) elites are the main creator main the are elites (2) universal; are elites (1)

20) tts tee r sm cmo caatrsis ecie fr these for described characteristics common some are there states, (2000)

h etn alwd y h dmnn elites dominant the by allowed extent the opczyński eir competence and enhance modernization of the country in the in country the of modernization enhance and competence eir

omtv sne f eortc hoy i peet n post in present is theory, democratic of sense normative elites are , 2000:130). 2000:130). ,

integrated social groups; (5) elites shape not only only elites shapegroups;(5) not social integrated 14

emn(03 lo nelnsta n the in that underlines also (2003) Gelman

lts “ elites: determined by) various segments of the segmentsof various determinedby) n, while partial reforms in other cases other in reforms partial while n, - Soviet countries, includ countries, Soviet as tiue and attitudes mass - Soviet countries. A c A countries. Soviet s of the political system; (3) (3) system; political the of s Successful reforms can be be can reforms Successful (emn 20: 90). 2003: (Gelman, ” ing Armenia Armenia ing

eair in behavior ommon ommon - CEU eTD Collection in applicable be can approach this reforms, economic transition on is study his though Even kind. different of groups interest of influences the from reforms the the keep can reform ref the from losers the of presence the therefore, 1146), 1991: Rodrik, and (Fernandez diffuse” are losses the while individuals of number small a on concentrated Fernande continued sphere reforms ineconomic insiders: from came post in reforms the that research his in H As reforms. the before positions holding were which servants public tothe oldbuilding opposition Shevardnadze’s hiscampaign around regime. politicall also was Saakashvili government. preceding the of regime the of an discrediting a as served cleaning bureaucratic was his and politician, independent president the that fact the to due was it out, points 59) (1994: Geddes in As reform. successful with very Saakashvili to be compared be can to and reforms appeared administrative implementing Quadros, Janio president, Brazilian the of The losers influential reforms. of presence the and government the of insulation of lack to due im to impossible were reforms the case this In 52). 1994: (Geddes, resource” that of part significant a up give to persuaded be not could them of majority a and resource, political orms from being undertaken. This turns to be a question of lack or presence of insulation of of insulation question oforpresence lack of a tobe undertaken.from Thisturns being orms ad ork 19) lo ru ta “h gis rm h sau qo a be may quo status the from gains “the that argue also (1991) Rodrik and z Independence is especially important when dealing with politicians and other other and politicians with dealing when important especially is Independence hs hw ta te reform the that shows This undermined the creation of a stable legal foundation for the market market the for foundation so legal stable from economy” 204). 1998: (Hellman, a and of creation rents; the undermined monopoly local of their protect to regions their into entry market prevented have who profitable enormously officials local their from markets; financial distorted in opportunities arbitrage preserve to stabilization macroeconomic asset strip to firms' only owners new their become have who insiders enterprise “from s; from commercial bankers who have opposed opposed have who bankers commercial from s; - - aig rcs cn e itre b itrs groups. interest by distorted be can process making Communist countries, most of the opposition to the the to opposition the of most countries, Communist

- called Mafiosi who have have who Mafiosi called y independent from the old system, old the from independent y

this thesis. In the context the In thesis. this ellman (1998) argued (1998) ellman

share share

i police his plement CEU eTD Collection the of content the is explanation alternative first The argument. main the to linked are as well as considered be ofpersonal orpoliticalpotential loss benefits. this to according difficulties, had Revolution, the successful outcome for costs political can who high though bureaucrats, existing corrupt not new, are appointing there when implemented hardly be would reform discussed be will which Armenia, of case the to applicable political tend reforms the Therefore, 27). or1994: (Geddes, benefits” personal either of loss immediate and certain a involves often administration involved politician But non are they as everyone, by enjoyed be can says, she reform, the of benefits The (1994) Geddes reform. the implement new easier can while therefore, and, support implementation, political bigger reform have governments the of costs high various face can elites unchanged have should or eliminated them. losers the from insulated either been have should reformers the way this In implemented. be to reform the allow not to be would interest their theory, this to according officer police and bureaucrats the the from are losers reform main the among later, indicated be will As transition. of period the after reforms the implementing of terms in role, a play could aspect this Armenia, and Georgia of

hr ae h css hc cn e ruh b te eomr: fr h administrator the “for reformers: the by brought be can which costs the are there eann gvrmn o Amna wih i nt hne uig h attempt the during change not did which Armenia, of government remaining h mi arg main The Returning to the alternative explanations, there are three major ones, which cannot which ones, major three are there explanations, alternative the to Returning arg

major factors, but still contributed to the outcome of the the of outcome the to contributed still but factors, major ues that administrative reform is an example of a prisoner’s dilemma case. dilemma prisoner’s a of example an is reform administrative that ues , which can be caused by resistance of the losers of the reforms the losers the of resistance of caused by be can , which cosn te plcn ms lkl t cnrbt t ipoig the improving to contribute to likely most applicant the choosing , mn cn e lo hoeial spotd y h fc ta the that fact the by supported theoretically also be can ument 16

approach, with approach,

s who are involved in bribing. Therefore, Therefore, bribing. in involved are who s

not in rn anti bring

to be to detail later. detail reform implementation reform imple - orpin eom to reform corruption mented.

In a few words, the the words, few a In police reform, as reform, police - . Therefore, . This can be be can This excludable.

due to due r a or at a

CEU eTD Collection to related also is implementation reform full the Nevertheless, place. took reforms the why of higherbefore was corruption of level Georgian As threshold. certain reaches crisis the when implemented t The the eyesforeignactors. ofthe in credibility more and reformers, the to support popular provided which elites, the of change the by explained be can reforms Georgian of funding and interest higher and one, main the the to governments policy the in cooperation to due coalition informal an such as considered be can sponsorship, government coalition informal of kind a form to seen be can they whom with actors domestic existing of choices He approach. coalition on (2006) argument Jacoby’s to back goes argument this of background would notbea Georgia in reformers the elite, the of change the without as argument, main the to related closely is it Georgia, in as successful as not were Armenia in reform the why defining for can implementation reform police fullreforms,aspartial to leadcanprocess,which implementation reforms the resistcan which The reform. makes which implemented, not were activities planned the of many Armenia in reality in same, the were reforms the paper the on Though reform.

argues: “ argues: heory (mentioned, for example in Alesina (2006)) says that the reforms tend to be be to tend reforms the that says (2006)) Alesina in example for (mentioned, heory ” (Jacoby, 2006: 625). The involvement of the foreign actors actors foreign the of involvement The 625). 2006: (Jacoby, ” And the last alternat last the And actors. foreign of involvement an is explanation alternative more One My central point is that we should see outside actors as striving to inﬂuence the the inﬂuence to striving as actors outside see should we that is point central My

above - the reforms (Transparency International, 2011), International,(Transparency reforms the omto, iacn fo te bod n acutblt o te reforming the of accountability and abroad the from financing formation, reforms,ble toimplement full of influence avoiding ofthe thereform. losers - etoe theory mentioned consulting bodies. Nevertheless, this argument is also c also is argument this Nevertheless, bodies. consulting

ive explanation is explanation ive

be non be y ela (98 pit ot t h itrs groups interest the at out points (1998) Hellman by - benefiting them. benefiting 17

the

severity of cor of severity

it possible to describe it as a partial a as it describe to possible it While the explanation can be valid valid be can explanation the While it may be a relevant explanationrelevant amay it be ruption before the reform. the before ruption – losely related to to related losely Gs forei NGOs, The theoretical The

gn CEU eTD Collection outc the explain as well as Georgia, and Armenia in happening andtheRevolution change the elites of p was police motivated politically called be can therefore, situation, this in Saakashvili t and situation the over control the Theref oppress Revolution. a to for attempt managed Kocharian as government, the of change or instability political bribe s to be to seemed ubiquitous the encountered Georgia to visitors brief the corrupt how of sign visible a were police, trafﬁc move. predictable a was population the to visible and corrupted power in newly a popula obtaining in interested was Saakashvili president as elected and elections, fraudulent and corruption was Shevardnadze opposing people the in discussed applicable be can approach This of interest main the instability, ones. old the eliminating after schemes corruption own their created not did elites new the why comparingthe police extent, reform a in full toArmenia. government Georgian helped constraints internal of lack as argument, major the ” (Mitchell, 2008: 176 2008: (Mitchell, ”

Ge ddes There teeoe ipeetn te eom i te etr hc w which sector the in reforms the implementing therefore, , The theoretical framework used in this paper helps to understand the processes processes the understand to helps paper this in used framework theoretical The

(1994) shows i (1994) shows olitically strategic move, which is also related to the events of the Rose Rose the of events the to related also is which move, strategic olitically is also one issue which has which issue one also is Chapter 4, Chapter o seigy admy sel randomly seemingly top

the main reason for the revolution to appear and to gather so many many gatherso to and appear to revolution the for reason main the - 177). n the example of Latin Americann theexample ofcountries

politicians is to remain in office and to have to and office in remain to is politicians ee a n ne fr gaining for need no was here r, ih l te ae maue, t a psil to possible was it measures, taken the all with ore,

In Armenia, in Armenia, In also .

o Georgia for

to be considered here considered be to 18 ected ected

contrast

fe te oe Revolution Rose the after Shevardnadze regime had become. Even Even become. had regime Shevardnadze

n hrs te utl hy rdcd a produced they until them harass and trafﬁc police whose sole responsibility responsibility sole whose police trafﬁc

, there was no such period of major major of period such no was there , r support to be able to remain remain to able be to support r

“ popularity. The actions of of actions The popularity. The police, particularly the the particularly police, The

in regards to the question the to regards in ms f h reforms. the of omes

in ere

the , and clearance of of clearance and ,

among the most most the among popular support. popular

case of political case ofpolitical . to implement to As

il be will obtain

CEU eTD Collection a had Osetins Georgians), population the of percent 46 with percent (17 Abkhazia in minority regained conflict 90 the of beginning the since which In disputes. territorial and were t of index CPI the of was results the corruption and countries of both in concept similar the of perception the that so way this chosen were cases The thei in common in lot a have and past similar share countries The size their in (Figure similar are countries The Caucasus. North the in countries neighboring two framework.and this fitinto cases comparable are Georgia and Armenia why indicate also to important is it Nevertheless,

valid. valid.

2.1 The case selection was was selection case The Gallina (2010) demonstrates that bot that demonstrates (2010) Gallina

). Both were a part of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union before the 90 the before Union Soviet the and Empire Russian the of part a were Both ).

its its Figure 2.1. Armenia and Georgia map. Source: massispost.com Source: Georgia map. and Armenia 2.1. Figure 2.2. urgency

I ntroduction

the

case of Georgia there are two territories Abkhazia and Ossetia, and Abkhazia territories two are there Georgia of case gi. s uy 19) ons u, atog Aka wr a were Abkhaz “although out, points (1995) Suny As again. made - wr ne eaait influence. separatist under were s into the Cases and Methodology and into theCases on a most a on 19 corruption of type same the faced countries h - similar basis. Georgia and Ar and Georgia basis. similar he Transparency International Transparency he r culture (De Waal, 2010). 2010). Waal, (De culture r

In 2008 the frozen frozen the 2008 In

menia are are menia - s. CEU eTD Collection deal to had and conflicts territorial the faced countries both that fact The 27). 2006: Starr, and reform, au the increasing instead and movements democratic reversing or weakening to contributed conflicts “the the financia and largemilitary are Starr and Cornell by mentioned similarities other the Among countries. the of population the of size the to relatively small was minorities ethnic of size the that underline they Second, of involvement with territorial were conflicts both that is first involved: out regime,of political power distribution, ofdevelopment andterritorialdispu level semi p the of Most weak. remained parties the and parliament the of role the Union Soviet the of collapse the after countries both in that emphasizes she Also, Revolution. Rose the during government the developmen state the with agree not did citizens Georgia in that fact the was Armenia and Georgia between difference main the that argues Gallina 25). 2010: (Gallina, whole” a as state the and system institutional the besid territorialityofstand Unresolvedissues exclusion. well public’s the for function not do that post face to have “Both this for chosen were which states two the between similarities other underlines living. is minority Armenian the where Azerbaijan, with territory Karabakh Nagorny the way this In (1995:156). District” Autonomous Osetin South the in percent) (66 majority clear , presence of gender violence and violence gender of presence

conflict became even more apparent in the latter. The conflict in Armenia is over the the over is Armenia in conflict The latter. the in apparent more even became conflict there are several similarities between the conflicts in which Armenia and Georgia were were Georgia and Armenia which in conflicts the between similarities several are there - authoritarian way. In other words, the selected the words, other In way. authoritarian Considering closer the disputes in each country, as Cornell and Starr (2006) point point (2006) Starr and Cornell as country, each in disputes the closer Considering olitical power was concentrated in the hands of the executives, which ruled in a a in ruled which executives, the of hands the in concentrated was power olitical - thoritarian character of government in the name of stability” (Cornel (Cornel stability” of name the in government of character thoritarian communist political realities, i.e. economic decline, state structures structures state decline, economic i.e. realities, political communist l support to the re the to support l t trajectory, which was destroying the country and removed removed and country the destroying was which trajectory, t

“devastating” impact on the economy in both countries: both in economythe on impact “devastating” - bels from bels en ad usin o trioil nlso and inclusion territorial of questions and being 20

cases have much in common in common in much have cases

abroad, failure of negotiation processes, negotiation of abroad,failure e the necessity for the development ofdevelopment the necessityfor the e ethnic minorities. minorities. ethnic tes.

questions research: Gallina

CEU eTD Collection police,of and thepublicservice poor ingeneral. quality o of influence and decline economic countries experienced Both similar. very was reform police the particular, in and, reforms, corruption anti the before Georgia Armeniaand in situation the Ingeneral, Union. Soviet the ofcollapse share they th size, their in similar are countries The sector.police the in reforms the of political, studycontrol this in for factorsrelated tothe various regime civil society. and were almost scores the that, Before Revolution. Rose the of consequence a as considered be can improved had Georgia it, reports House Freedom (2013). Freedom Source: House free”. “not 7 2. Table problems and theirinthe 90 situation police the of quality corruption. of level the and service the on impact an had which Union, Soviet the of collapse the after state on forces their concentrate to them of both allow not did issues military with 1 h sm i bt Goga n Armenia and Georgia both in same the (A) Freedom House scores of Armenia and Georgia in 1998 Georgia and Armenia of scores Freedom House (A)

vrl, h css f rei ad eri wr coe fr hi smlrt. Their similarity. their for chosen were Georgia and Armenia of cases the Overall, is There e conomic and social scenarios social and conomic culture and historic past. Both have been involved in territor in involved been have Both past. historic and culture almo st no st Georgia Armenia Country/Year

difference in the in difference

This - s before the reformss before thever was

3,5 4 ‘98

shows that Armenia and Georgia experienced similar similar experienced Georgia and Armenia that shows most l most

4 4 ‘99 level of democracy in democracy of level 21

ikely were supposed to bring to supposed were ikely

Tbe .. A) 2.1. (Table rganized criminal groups, corruption in corruption groups, criminal rganized the level of freedom only after 2005, which which 2005, after only freedom of level the 4 4 ‘01

4 ‘02 4

- 2004. Score ranges from1 Score 2004. 4 4 ‘03

wih ae t osbe to possible it make which , y alike. much 4 4 ‘04

Armenia and Georgia. As Georgia. and Armenia

ial disputes after the the after disputes ial eir region, regime, region, eir the same results results same the

- “free” to “free” - bu ilding ilding the - CEU eTD Collection of overview brief as well as reforms, in It school. choice rational within lies question research the answering for chosen framework those twocases ref the of outcome the in differences the explaining while constant, them holding variables, various for controlling allows method reform andevents oftherevolution content moveme are, Georgia and Armenia of cases the similar how demonstrated was 304). it Above 2008: (Seawrightand Gerring, interest” except theof independent variable in measured the all on similar is cases of pair chosen the form, purest cludes approaches on approaches cludes Table 2.1(B) Most Similar Analysis with Two Cases. Source: Seawright Gerring and Seawright Source: Cases. Two with Similar Analysis Most 2.1(B) Table h mto apid n hs td i cmaaie ih ot iia css “n its “In cases: similar most with comparative is study this in applied method The Th is

(Table 2.1 (Table hpe described chapter the interests of politicians in politically unstable systems. It also gave a a gave also It systems. unstable politically in politicians of interests the the .

B) presence of the losers, costs related to the implementation of the of implementation the to related costs losers, the of presence . miis eid h coe tertcl approa theoretical chosen the behind empirics

the orms by the remaining variables, which are different in different are which variables, remaining the by orms ao apoce ue i ti suy Te main The study. this in used approaches major 22

nts will also beanalyzed.nts will This

and in Chapters 3 and 4 and 3 Chapters in and eedn variables, dependent , 2008: 305. 2008:

ches.

the CEU eTD Collection virtual into developed hence forces these progressed, 1990s the As investments. and trade ‘tax’ informally and supervise and region; the in industries largest the in stakes controlling th appropriating in leading were forces “TheseUnion: Soviet the of collapse the appearedafter groups interest new Starr, two countries had suchoutcomes. different anti the why puzzling extremely this of argument Choo reform. n policy their in autonomy enjoy to able were 90 the reforms 90 the of overview an provides wit also situation the of description it includes as well as themselves, as reform the of content the with starts It corruption. of severity the and actors foreign of involvement elite, the of change reform, co explanations: four considers It Georgia. and Armenia in reforms police the either - s andvariousfactors. allows controlling for other 3. -

s, because it is it because s, fte onre ha countries the of

This chapter aims to consider what factors can be seen as major for the outcome of outcome the for major as seen be can factors what consider to aims chapter This EMPIRICALANALYSIS: FACTORS DEFINING SUCCESSOF This section This As a result of limited statehood and political instability, according to Cornell and Cornell to according instability, political and statehood limited of result a As sing the second time point also allows holding some factors constant. The main The constant. factors some holding allows also point time second the sing THEPOLICE REFORM ARMENIA IN AND GEORGIA section

a peri a discusses the similarities in the conditions of Georgia and Armenia in Armenia and Georgia of conditions the in similarities the discusses

s ht eoe h rfr te iuto ws o iia ta i is it that similar so was situation the reform the before that is d yet started developing developing started yet d 3.1.1. od when the countries had countries the when od ast lbrtd hog piaiain suh t achieve to sought privatization; through liberated assets e 3.1. -

corruption reform and, pa and, reform corruption Armenia Georgia the 90 in and

Content ofreforms the

- 23 making process, and it is also a period where where period a also is it and process, making

anti -

c already obtained independence and independence obtained already ruto plcs including polices, orruption tclry oierfr in reform police rticularly, h corruption and police in the in police and corruption h

- s

tn o the of ntent

police police the se CEU eTD Collection (Kakachia governance” dutie ones’ of performance the than rather discipline and loyalty personal as such principles to adherence by determined are promotion, especially and, recruitment where cultures organizational of basis the on operates crime organized or policing predatory in involvement in situation the describe related of theMinistry: tothe activities the to related appoin newly Sargsyan, by policies the of focus a be to called even was and problems biggest the of one be to claimed was Hiscock, and Avagyan to according crime, organized with connections th of Ministry the of heads of changes experienced vulnerablevarious and government very been inthe has the police sector andthe situation avoid the involvementgroups. of other in present were which capacity, state low and corruption crime, organized to related issues similar had countries econ shadow ted Minister of Internal Affairs in 1996. As researchers point out, one of the problems the of one out, point researchers As 1996. in Affairs Internal of Minister ted people attack to began who caused also economic them which dissidents, political assassinate to units the 1993 As in clear, front. became political later the on echoed was Siradegian’ interference from economic directive This a office. following kits, aid first with transport supply to public monopoly a from benefited Siradegian of relative close a 1996 in example, one In economy. the of sections profitable most the of some control the that seemed it particular, In and crime the order, keep prevent to attempting simply than rather that apparent became It “As Siradegian’s reign w reign Siradegian’s “As Avagyan and Hiscock (2005) argue that in Armenia since independence in 1991 in independence since Armenia in that argue (2005) Hiscock and Avagyan iia polm wr eprecd n eri a wl. aaha n O’Shea and Kakachia well. as Georgia in experienced were problems Similar mc ogoeae” Cre ad tr, 06 4) Bfr te eom both reforms the Before 41). 2006: Starr, and (Cornel conglomerates” omic Ministry of InternalAffairs of Ministry the

and Ministry of Internal Affairs Internal of Ministry police as well and which did not allow the government to manage to government the allow not did which and well as police

O’Shea, 2012). O’Shea, eea cutis including countries, several e Internal Affairs due to corruption. Corruption in the police andpolice the in Corruption corruption. to due InternalAffairs e acrig o h picpe o sm sr o democratic of sort some of principles the to according s ent on, the Ministry became increasingly unpopular. increasingly became Ministrythe on, ent problems” and (Avagyan Hiscock, 2005:27).

in general is the economic and political interests not interests political and economic the is general in iity f nenl Affairs Internal of Ministry iity f Int of Ministry This 24

means that Georgia before the reforms faced faced reforms the before Georgia that means

was also pursuing other interests. other pursuing also was

, the political elite in each country country each in elite political the , ra Affairs ernal

eri: Tu, eades of regardless “Thus, Georgia:

formed special special formed a amn to aiming was

it s CEU eTD Collection the follow fi in results positive bringing are Georgia in reforms that clear already is it process, the of end the yetreached not reformshave on still are countries both in reforms The results ofthe reforms countries both reforms Georgia and Armenia in place took corruption of level the in change next The case. each in results different brought police administration the and low extremely was operategovernment personnel. to ofits waswith thehelp unable Georgia in reforms the before capacity state the that shows 2006:659 (Papava, projections” behind lagging started revenues budget national w 1998, as early as noticeable became which of symptoms ﬁrst the crisis, budget a advice, expert and of escalation bythe characterized was period This appointments. government his senseespeciallyin common disregarding began Shevardnadze Eduard President 1999 in “Unfortunately, budget: the of percent 70 around collect to able only was it 1999 out points (2006) and crime organized the to incen of different kinds ties close having police with Armenia as problems similar , as well as it will afterwards will it as well as , Si The reforms in Armenia and Georgia started in the very beginning of the 2000 the of beginning very the in started Georgia and Armenia in reforms The police iaiy of milarity

tsig f h rfr cnet ol sre s n explan an as serve could content reform the if testing , in Armeni in , 3.1.2.

eom rcs i Amna n Georgia and Armenia in process reform the state was working ineffectively during the Shevardnadze rule and in and rule Shevardnadze the during ineffectively working was state the .

tives from the official responsibilities of the police officers. As Papava As officers.police the of responsibilities official the from tives

PoliceReform a and Georgia in the 90 the in Georgia and a the rbes ih orpin n oie n gnrly n public in generally and police in corruption with problems hig orpin This corruption. ghting

consider the actual reforms which w which reforms actual the consider ’s Outcomes - going and evolve with time. And even And time. with evolve and going 25

- s

makes it puzzling it makes

Armenia Georgia and section

n te et two next the and

and

will

to , first, demonstrate w demonstrate first, ,

opr te activities the compare after the implemented implemented the after the how to o te different the of ation ere undertaken in in undertaken ere

section

reform of the the of reform

- though the the though 660). hen actual hen aim s This hat hat

- to s.

CEU eTD Collection the (2006), Trebbi and Ardagna Alesina, and (2005), Mody and Abiad as researchers such by noted As dropped. drastically it where 2004, before corruption of level the to attention Revolution. Rose the after formed was government new a and sudden the the sec leve years the over i increase the demonstrates Armenia. in same the nearly staying while Georgia, in capacity state a of Two corru of elimination in change significant international bodies state each by undergone l of perceived corruption by corruption perceived of l Source: Transparency International (2011). International Transparency Source: that acoun 10 means and a corrupt highly as is perceived country 3.2( Figure figures ond time point chosen in this study, as well as in the period after reform. Remarkable is reform. after asinthe period as study, well in this chosen point ond time 0,5 1,5 2,5 3,5 4,5 0 1 2 3 4 First, it is important to demonstrate that the reforms in Georgia brought a a brought Georgia in reforms the that demonstrate to important is it First, improvement in Georgia after 2004 after Georgia in improvement

below demonstrate general decrease in the level of corruption and improvement improvement and corruption of level the in decrease general demonstrate below A

in Georgia in )

Corruption Perception Index in Armenia and 1999 in Georgia and Armenia in Index Perception Corruption .

. The data for the diagram was collected over collected was diagram the for data The .

n the Corruption Perception Index by Transparency International Transparency by Index Perception Corruption the n hog aayi o te ea at, eot b ntoa and national by reports acts, legal the of analysis through Georgians and Armenians in the 90 the in Armenians and Georgians

ption in the police sector, comparing to Armenia. Armenia. to comparing sector, police the in ption 26 , which is a year when Saakashvili was elected was Saakashvili when year a is which ,

try is perceived as very clean”). very clean”). as istry perceived

It is also imp also is It - 2011 (“0 means that a that (“0means 2011 - s before the reforms, in reforms, the before s 22 years and includes includes and years 22 Figure ratt draw to ortant Georgia Armenia

3.2.(A)

CEU eTD Collection Armenia2006, whereGeorgia and higher ofalittle thelevel than scores Armenia. the from capacity state its increasing cont and rights propertycorruption, reform. in capacity state post first the in capacity state of capacity. state building in countries other among Armenia t losers can them. constrain how of ways less second, and, elections, and Revolution recent the from reform such the enabled schemes corruptions existing o change the distort which country, the in present corruption of level the with inevitable were reforms complete Georgia in that problems economic “moderate” more of times in than crisis of times in decisively more stabilize to easier is it largely and reformimplementation, crisis. severe a by triggered be can reforms Fortin’s F igure f the elite and lack of tight relations with the losers from the reform through through reform the from losers the with relations tight of lack and elite the f

21) esrmn o sae aaiy nlds a rvne, ee of level revenues, tax includes capacity state of measurement (2010) anti various after already 2006, 3.2.(B) ” (Alesina, Ardagn (Alesina, ” ed

collection of revenues for the budget, etc. Nevertheless, Nevertheless, etc. budget, the for revenues of collection

below demonstrates the dynamics which were made by Georgia and Georgia by madewere which dynamicsthe demonstrates below

- communist

ract enforcement. It shows that Georgia made a big leap in in leap big amade Georgia Itthat shows enforcement. ract discuss the “crisis hypothesis”:“ “crisis the discuss first post first a and Trebbi, 2006:2). Trebbi, and a

reformers to have, first, legitimacy to implement implement to legitimacy first, have, to reformers The studies are d are studies The 27 years - Soviet year where Georgia lagged far behind far lagged Georgia where year Soviet

- w orpin eom, nldn te police the including reforms, corruption hile the vertical line shows th shows line vertical the hile The horizontal line shows the level level the shows line horizontal The edicated to problem of economic of problem to edicated And it is possible to conclude to possible is it And namely with the idea that idea the with namely in particular particular in

e level of level e he he

CEU eTD Collection be to and reform the from losers the against stand to able be to support popular the obtaining that fact the in lie can explanation the before, cited was as and, country, the in institutions trustable most the of one become police Georgians for that clear is it Nevertheless, evaluations. expert opinion, public include International) Transparency by Index Perception Corruption as (such indicators the while corruption, of levels lower demonstrate is Georgia with case the is it Whether themselves. for benefits secur ones, new create to but governments, old the from competitors the eliminating schemes, corruption old the of rid get to politicians the for common is It Georgia. of 3,5 to Accor high. as "1" from ranges which 2013), Bank, (World rating sector public the in corruption chosen been has indicator corruption o eosrt the demonstrate To h nw lt wih a come has which elite new the ding to this index, for example, in 2005 Armenia had a score of 2,5, comparing 2,5, of score a had Armenia 2005 in example, for index, this to ding communist year to 2006. Source: Fortin, 2010. Fortin, 2006.Source: to year communist 3.2 Figure ( B )

Comparison of state capacity scores from post from scores capacity state of Comparison

at ht h cruto hd eeal dcesd another decreased, generally had corruption the that fact -

World Bank CPIA transparency, accountability, and accountability, transparency, CPIA Bank World

o oe drn te eouin a i ne of need in was revolution the during power to 28

a question a entrepreneurs’ surveys and and surveys entrepreneurs’ - , but the indicators the but , -

low to "6" to low ing the the ing CEU eTD Collection government,schemes created according new indices. tothe corruption by the most the of one as course political the continue to able the sectors which are perceived to be the most corrupt. Analyzing the results of the survey survey the of results the Analyzing corrupt. most the be to perceived are which sectors the International. Barometer possible explanationsforpossible thesuccess a activities corruption. of level the decreased which measures what and elections the and Revolution the u long 2001 (GRECO, corruption” of suppression and prevention the with deals and 1997 in adopted was Georgia: in example population reported policea havingbribe paid tothe road indica survey 2010 A reveal. surveys several as sharply, World the by report a is police 2013)). (Transparency, judiciary educa for 4,2 with altogether (4,1, state the in sectors corrupt most the of scores lower 2 from ). ntil the Rose Revolution, which, fir which, Revolution, Rose the ntil 001 to 2011, it is possible to make to possible is it 2011, to 001 eetees te ee o cruto i Goga eand prxmtl te same the approximately remained Georgia in corruption of level the Nevertheless, were There have been several attempts to adapt single legal acts in both countries, as foras countries, both in acts legal single adapt to attempts several been There have the consider To

uvy ( Survey in

undertak the level of perceived corruption perceived of level the

is a public a is visible to the public. Thus, it Thus, public. the to visible “The Law on Conflict of Interests of Conflict on Law “The rnprny nentoa, 2013) International, Transparency en by the Armenian and Georgian governments to be able to draw to able be to governments Georgian and Armenian the by en level of corruption in the in corruption of level

opinion survey that demonstrates through one of the questions the of one through demonstrates that survey opinion

Bank. They state: “ state: They Bank.

. Another evidence of decrease of corruption in Georgian in corruption of decrease of evidence Another

Therefore n d lackreforms ofsuccessin ofthe Further the the st, raises 29 conclusion that Georgia’s police have got twice twice got have police Georgia’s that conclusion , the police sector was strategically important strategically was sector police the ,

did not become not did , while in Armenia the police remained one one remained police the Armenia in while , sections

a Corruption in the police force has fallen has force police the in Corruption

police only there is a Global Corruption Global a is there only police question

ee ae b te e government new the by taken were and Corruption in the Public Service Public the in Corruption and tes that only 1 percent of Georgia’s of percent 1 only that tes conducted ,

” will deal with the question of what of question the with deal will (World Bank,2012) of why did it happen only after only happen it did why of

influenced by new corruption corruption new by influenced

y h Transparency the by the

tion and 4,2 for for 4,2 and tion two countries. .

CEU eTD Collection including servants, public of accountability assure can which measures initial These corruption. by affected Georgia international the of priorities. their setting and reforms the of directions major sketching in various sectors. O whi activities Georgia. of Justice of Anti Major 3.3(A) Table 2010 2010 2005 2005 Year makes d brief senseactivities a topresent overviewof the simultaneously place Armenia in ne can seecanne

National Action Plan for the ImplementationNationalthe for Action Plan ofAnti National Anti An National Anti A Program eetees tee r sm priuaiis o h Geo the to particularities some are there Nevertheless, that note to important is it all, of First ti h Srtg aatd n 05 a te is ma first the was 2005 in adapted Strategy The - in a T a in a Corruption Strategy Action(2005 Plan ch were not reflected in any legal act from the larger anti larger the from act legal any in reflected not were ch nd nd Georgia

able

experience on experience . The reforms transformed several sectors, and to have a wider pict wider a have to and sectors, several transformed reforms The . - - - corruption Strategy corruption Corruption Strategy corruption corruption 3.3(A) t 3.3(A)

3.1.3. w ere

he major he

built Programs Georgia: the What Package? Wasin

what is considered to be a crime and exploring sectors in in sectors exploring and crime a be to considered is what

no agr anti larger into programs

in Georgia. Source: Transparency International; Ministry Ministry International; Transparency Source: Georgia. in

30 most of the activities of the polic the of activities the of most

which determinedantiwhich - 2006) - orpin reforms corruption one by government. theGeorgian

aimed - Corruption Strategy (2010 o dcmn which document jor

ga cs, s t tre by started it as case, rgian at the

raig e legislation new creating Its focus is collaboration is focus Its

- police. The document document The police. corruption framework. corruption

- wih ee taking were which , corruption measures corruption e reform both reform e

aim - 2013) ed ure it it ure

CEU eTD Collection by Georgia: continue fightagainst corruption. extra needs it but corruption of level the 2010). Georgia, focus and corruption, toward alertness public and response enforcement law increasing as well as system, governance state effective the by clarified Plan Action this of Anti Bureau, Civil Affairs, Internal Finance, are there institutions involved Among competition. and tenders tracking electr new e of of awareness integration increasing control,conferences media declaration, income of mechanisms through service public in corruption for punishment of measures increased and citizens by authorities public auditing for opportunities are actions proposed study. 2010. Anti of Implementation the for Plan Action government Saakashvili’s by implemented of international andjoining UN organizations conventions. involvement underlines also It ministries”. pilot from examples concrete account into taking divid system management a up set to order in functions of distribution clear a “Establish responsibilities: of division clear suggests •

Restructuringdismissing corrupt improving police, training. officers, the salaries and Examples of the proposed the of Examples h mi epai o ti pcae f eom i ehnig transparency. enhancing is reforms of package this of emphasis main The Shahnazarian (2012) lists lists (2012) Shahnazarian activities what better understand To

The do The cument argues that argues cument rcs and precise

activities can be found in found be can activities the following reform following the

“Anti ou o ipoig conaiiy y extending by accountability improving on focus policy into ed - n o peeto o corruption of prevention on ing provision to keep the situation under control and to and control under situation the keep to provision

previous measures allowed drastically decreasing decreasing drastically allowed measures previous - - ae on later orpin taey isl: itself: Strategy” Corruption - Corruption Strategy Corruption 31 Corruption Interagency council, etc. The goals The etc. council, Interagency Corruption

nc rcrmn sses hc allow which systems procurement onic were oe a tk a ok t the at look a take can one , - aig n plc implementation policy and making

area

n h ant the in s Table 1 in the in 1 Table

other public bodies public other as

the main ones implemented ones main the for for . It is intended to be done be to intended is It . 2010 i - orpin package corruption - “ ” (Parliament of of (Parliament ” 2013 the establishment of of establishment Appendix of the of Appendix Ministries of of Ministries ” adopted in adopted ” a wl as well as , - platforms, “ National National T he he --

CEU eTD Collection evaluations. (CoE) GRECO documents, remained ofrecommendations inthe level and assistanceinthe policy act international non (Karosanidze, fu for information useful no almost provided they Overall, pages. three than longer were documents these of None strategies. internal submitted a ministries few But improved. only could be ways their strategies inwhich fighting for strategies submit ministries sector.or institution particular their within corruption the that requested Council Security National by out pointed as ones, ministerial several also were there acts legal major A Lawyers Young Georgia, (TI representatives NGO three and government of “comprised NGOs. various of of of transparency ensuring the too. restructure police the upon touched sectors listed the of most in ssociation

public procurement. - • • • governmental

Encouraging foreigndirectinvestment. Privatizing major assets government ( Reducingassociatedregistration andgateway taxes feeswith(a business for corruption). Even though though Even ( Karosanidze to According r police the Therefore,

and Young Economists’ Association) Economists’ Young and GRECO’s activities include three evaluation rounds with the forth plan forth the with rounds evaluation three include activities GRECO’s

2007 oie n gv ot nw nfr bt lo ae agr hne, uh as such changes, larger made also but uniform new a out gave and police ors.

She points out that in 2005 there was a Working Group created, which was was which created, Group Working a was there 2005 in that out points She actors; 2) :

hrfr, h ifune f oeg atr ws ue rsrce, and restricted, quiet was actors foreign of influence the Therefore,

involvement . t s important is It public servants’ incomes servants’ public

eetees te cs o o specify not do acts the nevertheless,

was supervising was eform was done from different per different from done was eform rther development of the national anti national the of development rther

f h itrainl cos a nt pcfe i these in specified not was actors international the of 2007 that ), these documents were created und created were documents these ),

such as railwayssuch as and mines). t Georgian 32 h

poes fdcmn eeomn included development document of process e

” and developing a more accountable system accountable more a developing and

(Karosanidze,

The NGOs planned to then comment on comment then to planned NGOs The

reformers with recommendations and recommendations with reformers h gvrmn dd o just not did government The

2007 direct spective - formation. : 2) :

- novmn o any of involvement corruption strategy corruption

s . Karo , because reforms because , Apart from these these from Apart er sa

nidze: “The “The nidze: supervision n ed in the the in ed ” ’

CEU eTD Collection Department; evening primetime,coveringcrimes the s television own its produce InternalAffairs (MinistryofMIA the whenbolstered also was profile public force’s and improvements its police, the of renewal the about camp media public a launched also government paychecks increased got policemen recruited freshly Trafficcreated the Police insteadold of a that fact the to ( them” gave we which painting and lo of kind US the radios, American cars, German nice new, them gave We ones. Soviet old the unlike much very look that uniforms nice new, gavethem we did, also we what good find to months three to two us took it And recruited. guys new had we then “So interviews: Georgians. by police of perception and image whole the 15 Department Police Traffic whole the firing gov on recommendations to corruption. against measures framework concrete legal efficient more creating on recommendations incrimina issues major two on focuses and 2011, to back dates report published last The future. near , 000 people wer people 000 ernment

guys and to give them initial training at an academy which is sponsored by the US. But But US. the by sponsored is which academy an at training initial them give to and guys h ms poiet hne wr md wti te el cetd arl Police Patrol created newly the within made were changes prominent most The anti larger a of part A tion and transparency of party funding (GRECO, 2011) (GRECO, funding party of transparency and tion

draws in various sectors invarious draws and eetees te eom as affe also reforms the nevertheless, part from hiring new new hiring from part e fired overnight. It was done in order to make a radical change and renew and change radical a make to order in done was It overnight. fired e

fne vsl b frin foundations) foreign by vastly (funded

also how, “Patrol”, that would run every day for 15 minutes during minutes 15 for day every run would that “Patrol”, how, - corruption strategy corruption went Mikhail Saakashvili Mikhail

Overall, the anti the Overall, ; a through additional training additional through of the day” (Devlin,of theday”2007:7). demonstrates consistency.demonstrates personnel part from new equip from part

33 Tbe 3.3.B) (Table aign to raise awareness among the population the among awareness raise to aign

td te departments. other cted , a new department of Patrol Police was was Police Patrol of department new a , –

the police reform itself reform police the - , 2005). , corruption program by program corruption e rls f ulc evc: “The service: public of rules new . Saakashvili said in one of the the of one in said Saakashvili As ment mentioned by Saakashvili, ment mentioned Devlin (2007) Devlin . Previous reports Previous . . ld (2011 Slade eln nelns ht the that underlines Devlin

in a Police Academy Police a in

As pointed out by by out pointed As started out with out started argues, ) calls attention calls oking badges badges oking the the vary from vary ) Georgian Georgian

began to beganto about

and :

CEU eTD Collection from list (2005) Kakachia Some Affairs. Internal decentralize to taken measures (2005). Dev Source: government. Georgian the by Activities PoliceReform 3.3(B) Table 2005 2004 2005 of End End of 2004 July 2004 Date 2007: 8) missions as such as well as work, f amnestied but fired, not were o researcher, According tothe Devl     

n (2007) in

the

The Financial est Police was InternalThe MinistryAffairseliminated ofthe MainAdministrative of Boards The Board MainAdministrative Highway was of established. Patrol “ The Ce in allregional capitals”. types oforganiz Internalthe structure Ministrythey ofthe are Affairs, as toother of connected mostly criminal tomoney offences forge inregard and laundering Protection of Order, Public Ecology Transport Police and the Department. the Ministry

TheBureauPassport National of the the nte iprat su cnetd ih h rfrs f h plc i Georgia in police the of reforms the with connected issue important Another wascompeting nowfreely onthemarket already above of the United Nations, the European Union, the OSCE, and other groups other and OSCE, the Union, European the Nations, United the of

iity f utr’ msus piae ulig and buildings private museums, Culture’s of Ministry ntral Telephone dispatch systemntral Tbili Telephonedispatch functioning at least is inthe capital ,

- hr w there the the Payment checks of inbank cash salaries instead of Renewal equipment ofpolice MinistryInternalAffairs ofthe Ministry the of Dissolution oftheDismissal Police Traffic Activity of Justice. Protection Po Protection the - ed crime mentioned of as following changes in duties of the the of duties in changes following

the functions were delegated to to delegated were functions the o ea isiuinlzd rmwr bhn ti restructuring this behind framework institutionalized legal no ther important departments, such as Criminal Police’s as Criminal such important departments, ther

or the past corruption and received new instructions new received and corruption past the or .

functions which previously belonged to the Ministry of of Ministry the to belonged previously which functions : lice, which “provided security “provided which lice,

ablished theMinistrywithin Finance. of However, the - Visa and Citizens RegistrationVisa and Citizens 34

of the State Security and renewal of the the of renewal and Security State the of

and Police creation of Patrol

Ministry of Internal Affairs Internal of Ministry te pbi bodies. public other d for government installations government for

money remainmoney

international lin (2010), lin(2010),

was transferred to was transferred

Saakashvili

” (Devlin, ” Boda and and Boda assistance

personnel within within

for their for si and , apart apart ,

are .

CEU eTD Collection 3.4.A Table See Armenia. Anti Major 3.4(A) Table 2009 2009 2003 2003 Year measures inthe country taken inother sectors. anti major the the measuresof most though department, policefiring the 2008). (OSCE, culture” police and safety community improving in factor important most the “is of creation the enhance to was Reforms Police the salaries, which financing more receiving started offices regional decentralization

Similar measuresSimilar werealso taken inArmenia.

mlmnain cin ln f h Ant Armenia the of Plan Action Implementation Republic ofArmenia Anti Anti Armenia the of Plan Action Implementation Republic ofArmenia Program h frt anti first The Georgia, Unlike In out point Kakachia and Boda As the last years last the - increases the efficiency increases oftheofficers. police orpin reforms corruption )

under - corruption corruption - orpin strategy corruption lines that Armenia is at a good place in place good a at is Armenia that lines

the primary focus of the mission of OSCE in Georgia in the fi the in Georgia in OSCE of mission the of focus primary the police reforms police Anti 3.1.4. Programs - - . Corruption Strategy Corruption Strategy(2009

t s motn t overview to important is It PoliceReform in

in Armenia Armenia in

in Armenia in

Gvrmn o te eulc f rei, 2003 Armenia, of Republic the of (Government 35 ti bogt pstv change positive a brought this ,

i the - - . Source: Government of the Republic of of the Republic of Government Source: . Corruption Strategy of the Republic of of Republic the of Strategy Corruption of Republic the of Strategy Corruption

did not include such radical measures radical such include not did practice of community poli community of practice

(2003 Armenia also

- - 2012) 2007) took the

and a and

corruption rating relatively rating corruption

the place simultaneously place

re now able to pay off off pay to able now re ao anti major

cing, which which cing, - s u to due as corruption corruption el

with d of d

as ;

CEU eTD Collection separate chapterreform. onpolice ( ACSIAP” anti of part as passed were bylaws and laws study). appendi the in found be can activities reform specific the of list extensive more The e the of creation equipment, the of (modernization implementation of ways t establishing ways various in resemble Georgia officers. public for trainings providing a raising on measures numerous hea as (such sectors in various legislation of kinds different harmonizing and corruption on conventions international 3.4.A) (Table transparency”. and publicity and continuity; and consistency are document, the to according reformers, the guided advisingbodies. similar of involvement the to Georgiandue to similar su firing trend, the reverse to trying is government of the though even number growing constantly is the bureaucrats that problems the among encounters also It region. the in countries the to ch issues as issues ch some

As stated in the Anti the in stated As Government personnel.      he rule of law, rebranding and raising awareness of the on the of awareness raising and rebranding law, of rule he

following the Strategy the following Introduce ensure normsto legal information inviolability ofpersonal Increaseeffectiveness and theusefulness register of population thestate of police traffic adequ of Ensure accountability and openness transparency, the Increase Improvenorms prescribing for trafficand rules sanctions violating rules these privatization markings activities As well as in Georgia, authors of the document identify document the of authors Georgia, in as well As

of the Republic of Armenia, Armenia, of Republic the of

l process, public finance, etc. finance, public process, th, education spheres). spheres). education th, t stain ih raiig rfi frihns n road and furnishings traffic organizing with situation ate - Corruption Strategy of 2009, “On the whole, more than fifty than more whole, the “On 2009, of Strategy Corruption aees f th of wareness Among the provisions are:Among theprovisions –

from the issues they address (the need for privatization, privatization, for need (the address they issues the from focus

In other words, the reforms program of Armenia and Armenia of program reforms the words, other In es -

36 corruption measures included in the 2003 the in included measures corruption on

e creat

negig campaign undergoing Though to Though ion of national legislation and adapting and legislation national of ion 2009 Therefore, the reforms content was content reforms the Therefore, “the ).

The Implementation Action Implementation The

The 2009 d 2009 The

ue f a ad impartiality; and law of rule a les a s

Major principles which which principles Major extent, it also contains also it extent, - going reforms) to the to reforms) going ih the with ocument contains a contains ocument - databases, etc. etc. databases,

presence of of presence

public and and public x of this of x -

2007 plan

CEU eTD Collection (2005) Hiscock and Avagyan 2002). Armenia, of Republic the of Assembly (National police pu the to related rights and responsibilities yeardetailed next the adapted police (National Chapter law Republic 2).A on ofArmenia, ofthe 2001: Assembly securi traffic Armenia of Republic the range. wide a of remain police the of responsibilities the and 2011, to up years A 2001: Armenia, of Republic the for grounds the immediately ( duties” and rights his/her him/her present to explain and him/her to restriction to obliged be shall employees Police the citizen, job officers police in rights 20 Armenia, of police. the of rights and responsibilities Republic the of Assembly (National 2001 old corrupt system eliminating in interest any obtain not did bureaucrats and reforms the movement, Revolution whi ones the to equal are measures the involved community international the for and paper the on Therefore, situation. existing the from benefit who reforms the of losers the of presence the to related be mea radical the of Lack accidents. traffic a ensuring e For strong. very not are provisions these behind Strategy, the for wareness of the public about public the of wareness

transparency The set of set The Nevertheless,   ty”, “supervision over keeping and use of arms”, “Ensuring the passport regime” passport the “Ensuring arms”, of use and keeping over “supervision ty”,

Ensurepolice quality proper organs’ workservice and of tothe public Ensure increase the lawfulness and ther ch were taken in Georgia, nevertheless, as the elites did not change during the the during change not did elites the as nevertheless, Georgia, in taken were ch

particularly police particularly

f h tafc oie ciiis rfres mean reformers activities, police traffic the of the concrete measures, stated in the Implementation Plan of Action Action of Plan Implementation the in stated measures, concrete the are

are

responsible for the “safeguarding the public order”, “ensuring order”, public the “safeguarding the for responsible traffic rules traffic : “ : In each case of r of case each In rticle 5). The document includes amendments for several several for amendments includes document The 5). rticle reforms started off with the L the with off started reforms A sures and partial implementation of the reforms can reforms the of implementation partial and sures r , as well as access to the traffic police statistics statistics police traffic the to access as well as , ticles which highlight which ticles 37

estriction of the rights and freedoms of a of freedoms and rights the of estriction esponsibility of police activities ofpoliceesponsibility

the 01

. t ulns functions, outlines It ). importance of the human human the of importance aw on police in April of April in police on aw

ape by xample, National Assembly of of Assembly National n ciiy in activity an the blic service in in service blic

The p The service in the service inthe a goal of of goal a

olice of of olice raising on CEU eTD Collection NGOs and attract NGOs bodies, municipal their themselves, Police a domestic both bodies, various of involvement proposes it that is document this to related issue important Another issue. the in change real or improvement large mean necessarily not does and ways many in interpreted ter the using with abundant is document the example, or result little bring can and budget state the of abuses open and precision lack measures proposed the Nevertheless, trafficking. Drug of relatedsecurity new issues tothe Police passports, Educa toincorporation of Police the by reform the It program”. in remaining t elite unchanged of interest the by explained be can which body, controllable a it made government the façade, the behind Nevertheless, restructuring. Ministerial included it as one 27). 2005: Hiscock, and (Avagyan him” but anyone to answerable longer no are police the as control, own his under firmly apparatus security the of part important this bringing in succeeded had President susp were commentators “many that underline Hiscock Avagyan of and 2013). Armenia, Armenia Republic Service ofthe (National Security of Republic the of government the under Armenia of Republic the of Police the and Armenia th under Service Security National the to Security National ad after that emphasize an ra o te eom ad xmls f h activities. the of examples and reforms the of areas main , such , nte iprat fiil ouet o e osdrd is considered be to document official important Another he body involved into corruption body involved into he less

is available for the period 2010 period the for available is as “Women’s Rights Center”, UNICEF, etc. The reforms involve international involve reforms The etc. UNICEF, Center”, Rights “Women’s as funding from variousfunding sources. from

Once agai Once o pting the law on police there was a downgrade of the Ministry of the of Ministry the of downgrade a was there police on law the pting rei includes Armenia n, the reform design in Armenia was very similar to Georgian to similar very was Armenia in design reform the n, nd international. Among the responsible agencies there are the are there agencies responsible the Among international. nd

a - Ministries 2011

38 ie ag o atvte. t ais rm traffic from varies It activities. of range wide

transparent icious, however, noting that in effect, the the effect, in that noting however, icious,

. T able m “new” or “modern”, though it can be be can it though “modern”, or “new” m

f dcto, elh Cnrl bank, Central Health, Education, of , 2

n opposite in in the in

e Government of the Republic of Republic the of Government e and only controllable tothem. h p The a ppendix chapter illustrates chapter ppendix , and taey of strategy lanned

oe orpin For corruption. more the tion institutes and institutes tion

Plc reform “Police a window a

the the for for CEU eTD Collection stricter bring documents legal new though even that argue (2012) Khechumyan and Ivkovich attitudes, reality are There mo radical a such make reform raises This Georgia. in taken measures the to comparison have there Armenia, In corruption. steps, radical other several made and reform the of beginning the before entirely personnel Police Patrol its dismissed onegoals ofthe activities. oftheir the of awareness public raising indicated offi and public procurement public transparent more ensuring databases, electronic maintaining and police other and institutions educational its equipment, directio main the Among organizations. international same the of involvement the of result the are reforms the during Georgia. creat and equipment new the of installation transparency. and t quality service public the of improvement the to directed s had have countries Both OSCE. and Union European of help the with reforms implemented states Both ers from making similar steps similar making from ers h Amna plc remains police Armenian the oee, t However, resemble Georgia and Armenia in place took which reforms the Overall,

t s osbe o make to possible is It and accordingly, the same level of corruption as in the Soviet Union. Soviet the in as corruption of level same the accordingly, and

studies es incomes cers’

hc dmntae ht ept te al o modernization for call the despite that demonstrate which Such reforms included measures on privatization in other sectors, sectors, other in privatization on measures included reforms Such ee ee oe ismlrte, as, dissimilarities, some were here ve

s n oh onre’ eom wr mdriain f h police the of modernization were reforms countries’ both in ns . n icesn pnlis o cruto crimes corruption for penalties increasing and

such Another as firing high firing as the

ismlrt r vdnilprilrfrs n Armenia. in reforms partial evidential are dissimilarity in Armenia, and what enabled Georgian government to government Georgian enabled what and Armenia, in ocuin ht iia lgl cs n picpe used principles and acts legal similar that conclusion Soviet a en teps o erae esne, u ntig in nothing but personnel, decrease to attempts been ir rights and improving public image of the police police the of image public improving and rights ir ion of electronic databases in both Armenia and Armenia both in databases electronic of ion 39 - - ye wt te ae qimn, nfr and uniform equipment, same the with type, rank

such ing

police officials, wh officials, police - imultaneous reforms in other sectors sectors other in reforms imultaneous

organizations as Council of Eu of Council as organizations eae srie, s el s creating as well as services, related o eape te at ht Georgia that fact the example, for the h

og nraig accountability increasing rough question of what could stop the stop could what of question o . Both countries countries Both .

were accused in in accused were

For example, For n paper on each other each rope, in , as . . CEU eTD Collection and Revolution Rose the of events defined which factor important most the is elites the of change the that argues it First, Armenia. and study.for this themain of argument section reforms. the form losers the of resistance the to due reforms, vast completing as governme reforms. the of losers the by endorsed were reforms partial as well as possible, be not could Georgia, in as personnel in reductions uninterested be would who team, old its with movement Revolution the and elections the through went government the In Armenia,contrast in firings. by massive themselves eliminatingthelosers wellpolice, as as reform the of losers the by unconstrained being them allowed It system. Shevardnadze’s old the with do to little had and before, ministers as serve not did who bureaucrats of consisted Revolution Rose the after governmentGeorgian Armenian the police. to “modernization” real bring and activities planned its implement to able 75). 2012: Khechumyan, reports NGO better critics place, in and are misconduct police of punishment discipline and investigation, increased as such corruption, commu reduce should which rules

Both dissimilarities dissimilarities Both nication with the population, it does not work in reality: “Although rules for detection, detection, for rules “Although reality: in worknot does it population, the with nication will will h sces f h plc rfr i Goga ad o i Amna I oeves the overviews It Armenia. in not and Georgia, in reform police the of success the This nt would not be able to consider firing personnel of the whole department, as well as department, whole the of personnel firing consider to able be not would nt go deeper into discussion of the revolution movement and will provide will and movement revolution the of discussion into deeper go section –

niae ht h efreet f hs rls s ek (Ivko weak” is rules these of enforcement the that indicate

discuss

are stemmed from stemmed are This calls This in resisting corruption, from which they are benefiting. Therefore, Therefore, benefiting. are they which from corruption, resisting in es

possible explanations of different reform outcomes in Georgia in outcomes reform different of explanations possible 3.2.

those ha those in

a question of why of question a Change ofthe elite Change ihu te hne f h eie, h Georgian the elites, the of change the Without ppening

40 the main hypothesis of hypothesis main the

–

corrupt politicians and public servants in servants public and politicians corrupt at

the same time in Armenia and links links and Armenia in time same the the Armenian government was not not was government Armenian

this study. The study. this –

primarily various various primarily

ih and vich h next The evidence renewed renewed CEU eTD Collection compete to gangsters allow not did and functions law paid “Badly groups: crime organized with illeg in involved were officers police the and countries both in corrupt very be themselves i directly distant from the oldones,unlike Georgiawere in elites new the demonstratethat will which events, political Armenian the and ofthe evenindicating description reform thebrief of to the thelosers from goes argument The reform. the of losers the of part vast a eliminated administration losers allow not did revolution the by brought service. public from removed were reforms losers the eliminating governmenta use could orderfor in and corrupt systemwas administration public whole res several as Before, avoid to able were and power to came politicians educated young outcome main the be could reform the of definiti the in role major a play not could they why arguments and explanations possible other some discus into goes it Then, argument. this support to background theoretical the to them on of thepolice reform success s o consider To losers the with relations their and elites the in change the that is argument main The nvolved in the corruption in Georgia and Armenia. and Georgia in corruption the in nvolved

n rei ad eri. n eri, fe te oe Revolution Rose the after Georgia, In Georgia. and Armenia in . As was described in chapter 3, the Ministry of Internal was inchapter considered 3, the Affairs to of Ministry described . Aswas compromat l cake. l

There were two types of changes brought by the Revolution in Georgia: in Revolution the by brought changes of types two were There ’ the aces on ot and out point earchers

(“incriminating evidence”)against each other, sharing a piece of of piece a sharing other, each evidence”)against (“incriminating channels of manipulating the reformers and part of the losers of the the of losers the of part and reformers the manipulating of channels oes f h rfr, n sol lo a te rus hc were which groups the at look should one reform, the of losers

Armenia. atr hc bogt dfeec i te oie reform police the in difference a brought which factor .

41 h change The - which to enforcement bodies implemented racketeering implemented bodies enforcement

act the same way same the act –

the police themselves controlled markets, controlled themselves police the

will be discussed in detail below, the the below, detail in discussed be will

f l gvrmn administratio government old of A nomenklatura cademia points points cademia

the ts of the Revolution Rose ts of as

old traps of the system. the of traps old they had

to survive theysurvive to new group of of group new , and the new new the and , to l activities al

the police the sing n CEU eTD Collection who serveministers didnot under afew Shevardnadze (with exceptions) (See Table 4.1.1.). ga Wheatley, says Saakashvili, resign. to Shevardnadze forcing Tbilisi, to supporters opposition of kilometers several of cortege a brought had days few a in and parliament, the to people WheatleyAs opposition. votes of number significant reported, authorities The fraud. electoral an recorded who Group”, Strategy “Global Wheatley vario to Georgia in elections Accordingthe during (2005), 2010). (Devlin, organizations” society civil in work to Georgia to returning before States United the or Europe Western in universities attended had several ev were advisers and cabinet his of Many time. the at world the in presidents youngest the of one him making 36, turned just had he 2004, early in office call. Saakashvili’s after government the in serve to order in West trainin after Georgia to returned members government the of some that fact the out alike the with himself surrounding continued Saakashvili in accordingly. point (2005) Finance and Justice of ministers as appointed were later who re the of the reform. losers potential the are activities police to related bureaucrats the and officials police the that T 221). 2009: (Kukhianidze, smuggling” and businesses small in omn ih h Sve pltcas wh politicians Soviet the with common ed omr gro formers

96,24 percent of support of percent 96,24 The events of the Rose Revolution Revolution Rose the of events The

out

, up within parliament within up

the members of the reformer group in the parliament did not have anything have not did parliament the in group reformer the of members the reports, Saakashvili organized a movement on the streets and led and streetsthe on movement a organized Saakashvili reports, had gone to gone had

uigteeetos n h olwn year following the in elections the during

with such politicians as Saakashvili and Noghaideli, and Saakashvili as politicians such with 3.2.1.

the pro the could be could us international observers international us 42 o

Georgia - tl remain still government bloc, which put it ahead of the the of ahead it put which bloc, government considered started considered

- minded. ed en younger. Like the president, president, the Like younger. en herefore, the argument assumes argument the herefore,

n oe. n h aftermath the In power. in “When Saakashvili entered Saakashvili “When Mitchell (2006) also points also (2006) Mitchell

were invited were

from , appointing new new appointing ,

the creation of creation the s Wheatley As , such as such , gs in the in gs

that the

a CEU eTD Collection corruption of existing schemes the into rooted not were they system, old the in working of experience have not did government appointed newly As 215). 2009: (Kukhianidze, unique” not is Georgia view tr cultural, in and rule Soviet in rooted 2005). Th (Whitley, problems solving of way a as schemes corruption in inclusion and blackmailing havin through made was institutions public the within underline to theinternal (2005), government,that, according important toWhitleypolitics is it wider the oldsystem attempt tooverhaul a of parcel and part was it undertaking; isolated an not was however, corruption, “Fighting Shevardnadze: from distinctiveness his demonstrate to directed were steps his all regime, of Justice. Ministry www.civil.ge; Source: 2004). February (appointed Revolution Rose the ministries after key the Georgian Heads of 4.1.1. Table of Internal Affairs Ministry of Justice Ministry of Finance Ministry of Defense Ministry Ministry

Regarding the change in the methods of how losers from the reform influenced the the influenced reform the from losers how of methods the in change the Regarding Saakashvili As is

was a common feature of post featurea of common was

Baramidze Giorgi Papuashvili Giorgi Noghaideli Zurab Bezhuashvili Gela Name ’s

and were able to start the police reform during the window of of window the during reform police the start to able were and

oiia cmag ws built was campaign political

Shevardnadze’sgove Served previous) a in(the minister as

aditional and psychological factors. From that point of of point that From factors. psychological and aditional ” (Engvall, 2012: 22). 2012: ” (Engvall, X (before 2002,resigned) - Soviet states: “Corruption and organized crime are crime organized states: “Corruption and Soviet 43

“ g rnments

n poiin o h Saakashvili the to opposition on compromat

” against each other, other, each against ” of part reformers’group Was X

CEU eTD Collection Traffic the of personnel whole the chapter, previous the in and above, mentioned was As themselves. 2012: 23). in corruption the of gover exposure Shevardnadze’s that knew He drives. anticorruption of benefits building support public and political the knew “Saakashvili system: old the up clean and enemies using was Saakashvili that academia in view common the by for argued be also be can system old the in inclusion 2004). Science Monitor, Christian (The o chairman the and minister energy former the violators, “ Railways: Georgian of head the 3. chapter in acts legal the in described re further and firings, massive the to proceed to possible was it Therefore, it. from benefit not did therefore, and, involved not were they as system the maintaining in minis to related bureaucrats and and police interconnected of system whole the Therefore, was nicelyEngvall described by (2012): schemes corruption the of system The losers. the of influence the avoid to and opportunity ters and reformers who did not serve in the government before did not have an interest an have not did before government the in serve not did who reformers and ters Police was fired, as well as were the low and middle rank heads of police regional regional police of heads rank middle and low the were as well as fired, was Police nte sd o ti qeto i te lmnto o a ag nme o losers of number large a of elimination the is question this of side Another 2012:17 offici stronggiving were rules there informal the obey and not did bosses,who those punish their to place in to sanctions informal payments of supply regular a provide to Officials eye. the we met what than organized more the was system upward the pass Thus, would pyramid. extortion and bribery from obtained revenue pyramid, a asStructured <…> sale. for position the of profitability the on depending $20,000, Te rc fr jb n h plc i si t hv be rangi been have to said is police the in job a for price “The

re not free to dispose of their collected proceeds as they wished, since they had they since wished, they as proceeds collected their of dispose to free not re - 18). 18). als strong incentives to participate in the informal market” (Engvall, market” informal the in participate to incentives strong als they they

mn wud ev a a rtx t cen p h sse” (Kupatadze, system” the up clean to pretext a as serve would nment the the involved in the same corruption schemes and newly appointed appointed newly and schemes corruption same the in involved anti - cor uto die s pltcl ol o lmnt hs political his eliminate to tool political a as drive ruption e a be jie i dtnin y te high other by detention in joined been has He The distinctivenessofThe An example of arrests and firings of high officials is officials high of firings and arrests of example An

f the Georgian Football Association” Football Georgian the f the new elite and unlikeliness of unlikeliness and elite new g rm $2,000 from ng forms which were were which forms the oie were police – -

- profile profile - CEU eTD Collection based was reputation His support. public hadwidespread nor government, elections, in experience neither presidential 2003 the in Kacharian against stood who StepanDemirchian, moveme the that is for reason main injured.The defeated were and forces armed the by met Neve overnight. streets the on stayed and resign to Kocharian for calling chanted they where parliament the to square Freedom from Georgia, by used measures took report, Polese and Beachain 20 than more brought opposition The 21). 2009: Polese, (Beachain plebisciteconfidence and ainthemajority President” toinitiate a cuttingoff debate pro the to response in boycott “parliamentary by 2004 of beginning the in started co the and opposition Armenian unified Georgia in Revolution Rose the the of it, events put (2009) Polese and Beachain As votes. of 60% than more received 2008), until stayed (and 1998 since power in was also who Kocharian, were president incumbent 2003 The fraudulent. of half first the in elections parliamentary and presidential turned 2004 early in Kocharian president As happened. had Wheatle shift power no and same, the remained schemes corruption old the as the organized crime eliminated fromwere thepublic service. the and corruption the in involved were who reforms the of losers the of number large a Therefore, 2005)). (Saakashvili, people” 30,000 to 25 about talking are (“We offices (05 pit out points (2005) y In Armenia, in Armenia, In

t akd od edrhp “h ms poiet poiin leader, opposition prominent most “the leadership: good lacked nt contrast the the ,

smlr oeet n rei wih ie t displace to aimed which Armenia in movement similar a , the reform could not be implemented and achieve its goals its achieve and implemented be not could reform the , lack of success of the events, as Wheatley (2005) puts them, them, puts (2005) Wheatley as events, the of success of lack 3.2.2. rtheless, as researchers put it, the protesters were protesters the it, put researchers as rtheless, out

which resulted in a hundred arrest hundred a in resulted which 45

to be unsuccessful. As well as in Georgia, the the Georgia, in as well As unsuccessful. be to Armenia

, 000 protesters on the streets and, as and, streets the on protesters 000

ruh pol o a march a on people brought s

eotd a reported and several and - Kocharian Kocharian links with with links nflict was was nflict s

CEU eTD Collection the in transparency increasing in interests any have were not which would losers of The chapters. existence previous schemes, in described corruption their maintain to able were they before, were who officials the as and implementation, h still officers, police particularly, reform and, politicians the from losers the Since Georgia. as conditions similar the in reforms a not did elite the of change the of absence the Therefore, chapter. grow even and level remain corruption the as schemes, corruption the distort not did and officers government the though even and 4.1.2) (Table change not did elite the as results same the achieve to manage corruption (2013) Armenia Republicof of Parliament Source: (2010), Adalian to2007). from2000 Heads 4.1.2. Table Internal Affairs of Ministry Ministry ofJustice and Economy Finance of Ministry Ministry ofDefense Ministry Communist Party,Demirchian” Karen2005: 193). (Wheatley, the on merely

fe te tep fr rvlto, ohra’ gvrmn cniud hi anti their continued government Kocharian’s revolution, a for attempt the After reforms.

at ht e a te o o te omr is Sceay f h Armenian the of Secretary First former the of son the was he that fact the the of the key Armenian ministries under prime under ministries key the Armenian of made

police, and this pro this and police, not did Armenia in reformers the paper, on reforms similar having Even s

according to Transparency International, as mentioned in the previous the in mentioned as International, Transparency to according

oe eutos n h plc pronl i dd o ht h cor the hit not did it personnel, police the in reductions some Haik Harutunian Davit Harutunian VardanHachatrian Serge Sargsian Name

cess is demonstrated in the worsening TI indices for indices TI worsening the in demonstrated is cess

mlmnig h rfr wr te ae as same the were reform the implementing Served under Kocharian’s government before the the reforms therevolution attempt for andthe before government Kocharian’s under Served (from 2002 e ld their positions positions their ld - minister Andranik Margaryan (served (served Margaryan ministerAndranik – of therepublicArmenia) of

Head of the Police oftheHead ofthe Government llow implementing the the implementing llow after X X X x

the police reform police the

on the same same the on –

corrupt

rupt

- CEU eTD Collection presencein order factors tobe ofother successful. anti G and Armenia in reform police the only elites the of change the from levels lower the on benefits which organization, hierarchical highly a as and 2013 Georgia, of underl Court to important is it Nevertheless, 2013). Armenia, ofJudiciary (Supreme Court Supreme example, for , in situation same before. position The this nothold who did a person by replaced Georgia was reforms, whilein beginn the during remained Armenia in Justice of have Minister the that above demonstrated tables The 2013). International, (Transperancy Eurobarometer to according judicia the countries both in that note to sw out break and Georgiansuccess repeatthe not could and elections 2003 of consequence a as changeofficials, athe ofWithout 2013). 2007Republican(The Armenia, Party in ofdeath his m have not afterwards) Department holding police the of Head the became (who Affairs Internal t remained holders position attempt the through power in Armenia. ee - orpin eom i bt sae my ae ifrn seiiiis n demand and specificities different have may states both in reforms corruption p away the losers, wh p away thelosers, office throughout the considered period. The main ruling Republican Party also did also Party Republican ruling main The period. considered the throughout office Even though it is not directly related to the main topic of this study, it is interesti is it study, this of topic main the to related directly not is it though Even at The The ajor changes in its structure, having the Prime Minister Margaryan as its head until head its as Margaryan Minister Prime the structure,having its in changes ajor

the highest. And once again, this study aims study this again, once And highest. the Armenian government remained the same on several levels: Kocharian stayed stayed Kocharian levels: several on same the remained government Armenian o he same too. It is especially important to note that the Minister of Minister the that note to important especially is It too. same he

could reform. resist the police 3.3. at

eouin s el s h eetos ad h ministerial the and elections, the as well as Revolution Other Other the eorgia, while the overall and some some and overall the while eorgia,

l P failure of the attempt of the Revo the of attempt the of failure

ossible ossible 47 ytm tl rmis mn te ot corrupt most the among remains still system

from E xplanations

the existing corruption schemes andschemes corruption existing the

explain the (lack of) success of of success of) (lack the explain ine the nature of the police police the natureof the ine

other lution, Armenia lution,

parts of the of parts

ing of the of ing continued the ng CEU eTD Collection in the quoteabove,which and presented been have which of examples activities, the practicing were them of all But others. organiza by also but GRECO, by undergone in anti out points Davison As sanctions. and rules norms, various through states targeted the of policies the shape to possible it made organizatio international various that argues Nye, and Keohane concept power” “soft the discussing in (2007), Davison process. reform movement, andwithout the changeplay ofthenot elites would their defining role. th of Each Armenia. crea together all which and argument, main the to related are which factors possible other several are there explanation major - corruption inther policies - - - is explanations alternative possible such of One their and elite the of change The “a two GRECO Compliance Reports” (Davison, 2007:138). Such activities were not only only not were activities Such 2007:138). (Davison, Reports” Compliance GRECO evaluationGRECO reports; a questionnaire; te a critical mass which allowed the reform to succeed in Georgia and not in in not and Georgia in succeed to reform the allowed which mass critical a te - round evaluationround of

the different outcomes of the reform in reform the of outcomes different the e e xlntos a eald y h otoe f h Revolutionary the of outcome the by enabled was explanations se

3.3.1. did not godid not recommendations beyond , egion. GRECO’s activities, Oneis which include: ofthem

procedure; there are several initiatives which played an important role important an played which initiatives several are there

Involvement

relations with the losers from the reform serve as a a as serve reform the from losers the with relations tions like Transparency International, OSCE and OSCE International, Transparency like tions

of foreign actors foreign of the

presence of foreign actors in actors foreign of presence the ns have created regimes which which regimes created have ns two countries. Nevertheless, Nevertheless, countries. two .

mhszd by emphasized

the

CEU eTD Collection within instruments legal necessary the of implementation the and conventions international d legislation any enacted “not has but GRECO, from recommendations received also which Macedonia, of case the of example an makes He process. reform the in role bigger a play can international the by implemented le organizations mechanisms the out, points Davidson reforms. as the of Moreover, outcome the influenced which factor primary the not was it but reforms, be can they though involvement actors’ foreign the Therefore, activities. further on recommendations received bo as2010). Nevertheless,we GRECO, pro a being Saakashvili, Georgia. in did but Armenia in results planned the achieve not did reform police ealing with prevention of corruption. This exemplifies the gap between the ratification of of ratification the between gap the exemplifies This corruption. of prevention with ealing th

countries and included similar recommendations to the countries. Both countries countries Both countries. the to recommendations similar included and countries (2013) (millionscurrent of Caucasus. South the to Assistance U.S. 4.2. Figure b con be could actors foreign the of Involvement -

Western politician, got words of support from abroad, especially the US (Welt, (Welt, US the especially abroad, from support of words got politician, Western ave room for maneuver for the states, and therefore, states’ internal reasons internal states’ therefore, and states, the for maneuver for room ave an important part of the scope of causes of different outcomes of the the of outcomes different of causes of scope the of part important an ll asll other organizations 49

sidered as one of the reasons why the the why reasons the of one as sidered ,

has

been closelywith been working

dollars) Source: Nichol Source: dollars)

CEU eTD Collection from set by the internal thecorrupt bureaucrats constraints andpolice officers. free be to reformers the for possibility the and Revolution the of outcome the to due Armenia major f were the with the losers reform changeelitecontributed implementation, andrelations but ofthe tothe their successful funding the words, other In reforms. the of implementation the of question the in abroad the importan moresuggestiontherewere the makethat to possible 3.4) subchapter the in discussed Police government Shevardnadze’s reformby police of attempts duringthe 3.2.A) (Figurecorruption decrease in achievedhave a should donorsinternational from 2000 the of beginning the after then reform, both in recorded corruption of Geor Armeniaand level the to Referring Georgia. with cooperation future the and changes about West the of excitement and elite, the in change the by explained also the differencewas 2008and significant not theevents until Ossetia. Abkhazia and in 90 the Arm by received amounts the agencies, States United the from funding the of case the in example for 4.2.), (Figure Armenia and Georgia to available became which funding of level the Analyzing 2013:3). (Nichol, Union European d biggest the Among Armenia. and Georgia to directed were which aid of sources different are there financing, of question the On implementation. reform police the of process the during received have countries the which funding of amount the domestic - s, and though the level of aid to Armenia declined after the beginning of the 2000 the of beginning the after declined Armenia to aid of level the though and s, It is true, that the level of of level the that true, is It jurisdictions” (Davison, 2007: 141 2007: (Davison, jurisdictions” gia, if the funding played a major role in defining the outcome of the police police the of outcome the defining in role major a funding played the gia,if actor which, in fact, enabled the attractivenessGeorgia over the enabled of infact, which, actor funding directed to Georgia is slightly higher, though it is is it though higher, slightly is Georgia to directed funding . As higher aid did not bring such results, it makes it makes it results, such bring not did aid higher As . ). - 50 s Georgia having higher incomes (Figure 4.2.) 4.2.) (Figure incomes higher having Georgia s enia were bigger than those of Georgia during during Georgia of those than bigger were enia Another

dimension of foreign of dimension onors are the United States and States United the are onors t factors than financial aid fromfinancialaid factorsthan t

(starting with the Lawon the with (starting

involvement is involvement

earlier - s,

CEU eTD Collection foreign therefore involved,reformers actors and fullreforms. the inGeorgia could implement c more and constraints less has government p the of outcome the defined which factor superior a remain still elite the of change explanation, plausible a is it though Even everyone. to visible country, wa which crisis, corruption serious a by led be can Georgia well. as reform police analyzing in useful be can it reforms, reforms the crisis. serious (2006), by triggered Trebbi and Ardagna Alesina, and (2005), Mody and Abiad to According reforms. the before Georgia in than lower was Armenia in corruption of level As

Figure 3.2(A)

demonstrated it, and it was discussed before discussed was it and it, demonstrated Though the “crisis hypothesis” is usually applied to the economic the to applied usually is hypothesis” “crisis the Though 3.3.2.

Severity cor of redibility from the population, as well as from the from as well as population, the from redibility 51

ruption Therefore, the police reform in in reform police the Therefore, s an obvious problem in the the in problem obvious an s

olice reform because a new new a because reform olice

in Chapter 3.2. Chapter in

a be can , the ,

CEU eTD Collection the fie as well as sectors, other in reforms police of types and both reforms Armenia, and Georgia in undertaken reforms the of comparison the includes while reform, the outcome the of afterwards losers the from resistance meet can process reform the that argued Rodrik used also research The actions. reformers’ the on constraints Hellman by (1998) insights included study The Armenia. in such of lack and Georgia in reform continuity and constraint internal in question the analyzed study this and literature, the in discussed study. reform the of losers the with relations their consequently,and, elites the changeofa is Armenia in success of lack and Georgia reformsin is hypothesis The Georgia. in than successful less same. approximatelythe population the gover 2000 early the in countries both in started reforms, The past. the in corruption of levels similar have and past cultural countr Caucasian nments, led to different outcomes. While in Georgia the reforms increased increased reforms the Georgia in While outcomes. different to led nments, ld of police andld ofpolice corruption.

who argues the reformswho of are that

The question of fighting corruption in in corruption fighting of question The The study first look first study The address has study This in the in ies ies

– police and decreased levels of corruption, its level in Armenia stayed stayed Armenia in level its corruption, of levels decreased and police

rei ad eri. h cutis share countries The Georgia. and Armenia

a b for be can The research question of this study is why the refor the why is study this of question research The ed -

, ept te iiaiis f h actions the of similarities the despite s, into the theoretical explanations of the relative success of the of success relative the of explanations theoretical the into d h polm f mlmnig the implementing of problem the ed s related tothe reform implementation.

o the to 4.

CONCLUSION ten distorted by the involvement of insiders, who put ofinsiders, by distorted whoput theinvolvement ten

eei o te eea pplto. h suy also study The population. general the of benefit which , 5

the that

found support in this comparative case case comparative this in support found post the major reason for success of the the of success for reason major the the -

oit ein a be widely been has region Soviet background of both countries in countries both of background the ’s a

framework of the elite elite the of framework approach iia hsoia and historical similar oie eom n two in reform police

ms in Armenia re Armenia in ms taken

(1991), the the

by both both by trust of of trust

who

CEU eTD Collection corruption of w elite the of change the to related also reforms impossible. the of losers the with relations the of break situation and result successful a such bring to Georgia in reform police the allowed which ot for change elite the of importance the emphasizes study This Georgia. in measures of series the Revolution. the during and credibility higher more are therefore, and,schemes from the reforms losers the by restricted was implementation their bodies), consulting international same the p action reform the in indicated actions the though even Therefore, positions. their holding continue to ministers and power in stay to Kocharian of government the allowed movement revolutionary the and Affairs Internal of before in place 2003 Georgia her factors are unimportant. In unimportant. are factors her

the - 2004 years in both states. both in years 2004 ,

successful to be free from the internal constraints put by the corrupt bureaucrats of the Ministry Ministry the of bureaucrats corrupt the by put constraints internal the from free be to lan and strategies were similar to the ones made by Georgia (due to involvement of involvement to (due Georgia by made ones the to similar were strategies and lan

hr ae he atraie xlntos o h otoe f h reform the of outcome the to explanations alternative three are There th by bound not are governments New studyofreform inArmenia thepoliceThe isthatthe success main finding ofthis Georgia allowed allowed Georgia in place took which movements revolutionary the of outcomes the by defined was to remain to

. The first is first The . – police reform in Georgia and Armenia. Nevertheless, it does not claim that claim not does it Nevertheless, Armenia. and Georgia in reform police

the corrupt bureaucrats. the same in Armenia in same the

recent legitimization of their power and their proposed course of action action of course proposed their and power their of legitimization recent W

ith all the received the all ith the involvement of international actors international of involvement the the reformers the

oie fies I Amna in Armenia, In officers. police The main argument is argument main The deed able to able , it states that all together, they created a critical mass, mass, critical a created they together, all that states it , ere ,

. However, However, .

implement the reforms. It also happens due to due happens Italso reforms. the implement wh : for :

support, the reformers were able to go through go to able were reformers the support, did not hold their positions in the government the in positions their hold not did eign actors, content of the reforms and severity severity and reforms the of content actors, eign

od oncin ad xsig corruption existing and connections old e without the chang the without that t that

hs success this he change in the elites which took which elites the in change he

contrast into reform implementation reform into

e of the elites the of e n Georgia in , the failure of the the of failure the ,

hc were which allowed

would be be would

and their and

gained gained

and and the CEU eTD Collection wh for decisive were constraints internal of lack and elites to bef Armenia in than higher was Georgia in corruption an reforms partial causing constraints, internal the resist not could government the of continuity fully not were implemented. activities planned the as partial only called be can Armenia in reform the actions the existingthat demonstrate are there Nevertheless, transparency. and accountability became countries both in reforms the of principles main the as well as Affairs, Internal of Ministries of and transparency increasing and database general.accountability Armeniaand Georgia undert in electronic single a of creation equipment, the work much done expectations ofagovernmentGeorgia new establishedin cooperation for perspectives new donors foreign because movements, revolution of Georgiaand thereforms in successof the ofexplanation partial a be could in US the from Armenia than funds more slightly received equipment new installing process

d difficulty in withreductions why it was so important for the reforms to be completed, though the very change of the the of change very the though completed, be to reforms the for important so was it why th orpin n rei. oee, hs xlnto as las s o h eet o the of events the to us leads also explanation this However, Armenia. in corruption police sector. Both sector. police e police, raising awareness in the society through a public campaign, restructured the the restructured campaign, public a through society the in awareness raising police, . The funding received by the government was used for the increase in salaries, salaries, in increase the for used was government the by received funding The . It is also important to draw attention to the to attention draw to important also is It Other This

alternative on developing anti developing on factor also factor

countries considered undergoing privatization, modernization of police of modernization privatization, undergoing considered countries and so on. Though the difference was small, Georgia, for example, for Georgia, small, was difference the Though on. so and

explanation is explanation taken

relates to the main argument main the to relates

police personnel.

teeoe ihr netet cud e asd y hig by caused be could investments higher therefore , by Armenia are not as deep as deep as not are Armenia by - corruption framework which extended much farther than than farther much extended which framework corruption the

54 content of the reform. Both governments have governments Both reform. the of content

welcomed

third explanatory factor explanatory third ook ore the reforms and it could contribute could it and reforms the ore .

activities directed to the rebranding directed tothe rebranding activities the change of the government and and government the of change the the

of the study, as in Armenia the the Armenia in as study, the of y the reforms managed to be be to managed reforms the y form of the assistance, which which assistance, the of form those in those

Georgia. the

that remaininglevel studies which which studies

the level of level the Therefore, Therefore, her her CEU eTD Collection would advance study. this using as (such relations studie academic are there though Even relations. governmental internal and schemes corruption on information of availability limited a is drawback Another studies. further for case a as serve can regime, political different a having though and reform, po the implementing in steps made had also state The countries. such among considered dimensions. various in similar are which countries picking as well as time, p was over which slowly vary which variables unobserved in result can also variable dependent the selecting with problem The etc. development, economic history, culture, regime, political wh countries generalizable the to with considered be to have conclusions the therefore, and, variable dependent the on selected also primarywhile importance a of as chosen factor was one only why is This cases. two of set a on variables of number large a of testing credible of anti in progress same the make to Armeniaallow not did reform the of losers the with connections study the of argument main the to due enabled contributed explanations alternative implementation. reform partial the to led which reformers, the restrain losers the place, took still reforms the though and change, not did elites the Armenia, In implementation. reform the during legitimacy Georgia. in completed - corruption measu the

A major limitation of such of limitation major A raet ae o frhr neecs Te idn o ti suy a ol sre as serve only can study this of finding The inferences. further for care greatest obtained artly solved by comparing countries in the second point in time (during the 90 the (during time in point second the in countries comparing by solved artly

during the Revolution and the elections the and Revolution the during res asres Georgia did. compromat They

nbe te e gvrmn t b epwrd ih the with empowered be to government new the enabled ich are similar to Georgia and Armenia in various ways: size,various ways: in Georgiaand Armenia to are similar ich , e.g.), expending the scope of the availability of the data data the of availability the of scope the expending e.g.), ,

an to the outcome of the police reform, though were only only were though reform, police the of outcome the to argument is argument

–

other the ak hne f h eie n remaining and elite the of change lack corru

complexity of the of complexity s ption was at a lower level and the the and level lower a at was ption serv in order in e s which describe the nature of of nature the describe which s

as additional

stand against the losers losers the against stand

of issue Azerbaijan can be be can Azerbaijan l te mentioned the All

the reform could reform the . The cases were cases The .

and difficulty and lice - s), s), CEU eTD Collection consequently public service improve and ofsecurity country. the level inaparticular pos with completed be to reform the for needed are which factors Defining approach. theoretical different a considering by corruption in decrease and reform police successful the for necessary are which factors The sector. this in reforms of implementation level return will ofcorruption before tothe where was it reforms. the the and equipment new received as has transparency well as rebranding, real through has department implemented fully relatively were reforms the Georgia de due consequently, and, 2007) (In Group, abuses on reports various and 2007) (BBC, resignation Saakashvili 2008) (Spiegel, 2008 August of events the after Georgia particularly, inter the around excitement of elimination to due instability. of pressure political under anymore not is government the as and, schemes, corruption new create can servants public and members government new the passes N policies. government’s new the of forefront the as police chosen was the reform therefore, and Revolution, Rose the after instability political of conditions the i involved not were and insiders the by influenced not were who elite, the of change the to due succeeded reform police the study, the of argument main the from Following permanent. not effe the that expect nto existing corruption schemes. corruption existing nto and police the in corruption of problem discussed widely a addressed study The can one corruption, the of level the and reform police the of future the Discussing

been increased thro increased been ct of the changes done by Georgia, and which lacked in Armenia, may be be may Armenia, in lacked which and Georgia, by done changes the of ct tv rsls a hl increas help can results itive It was important for Saakashvili to gain popular support in support popular gain to Saakashvili for important was It ugh electronic systems installed) it is not likely that the that likely not is it installed) systems electronic ugh rae f funding. of crease 56

study contributes to the major debate on the the on debate major the to contributes study

ainl omnt aot eri, and, Georgia, about community national

e cmaig o rei, h police the Armenia, to (comparing

fiiny f policy of efficiency

eetees te at ht in that fact the Nevertheless,

pplr ale for rallies popular , evertheless, as time time as evertheless, ternational Crisis Crisis ternational

It also can be so be can also It - aig and making,

CEU eTD Collection Financing; Corruption Political Prevention of Improved ofpolitical System party Corruption Interagency for Prevention Coordination of Improvement Administration of Justice Sector andCompetitive Corruption Systems andImprovement Customs of Tax Reform System Finance ofPublic Development Procurement ofPublic Service Impr Modernization Purposes Justic Table 6 (A).Action for Plan Anti ovement of Public and Administrative of and Public ovement

e ofGeorgia

of Civil Serviceof Civil

- Free Private

- Corruption Strategy Georgia. Source:Ministry of of

APPENDIX

57 seminars) of e “Public awareness raising inrespect “ service quality” enhancing satisfaction”, “Organizing trainings for quality; carryingconsumer out surveys on “ basis ofcompetition Service isrecruited completely onthe (including of interns) Public Electronic System”, “Staff Asset Declaration “ oftheExamples activities reporting and ofpolitical audit” parties election subjects, financial annual quality election campaign control for of “ P of Action implementation ofNational “ computer system “ transit product ofdouble license re toexport, to obtain natural and resources concerning licenses,construction licenses the “ electronic invoices”, tax management of “ ISSAI 20 transparency “

Management of tenders throughManagement oftenders e ofPermanent service Monitoring Elaboration of of themechanisms theissues Conduct conferences on ofSimplification procedures Elabora Implementation and of monitoring Inclusion inthe unified of courts Insuring accountabilityand lan - ” procurement system( procurement

tion of mechanism for oftion mechanism ” ”

in accordance withstandardin accordance

”

- ” export, import export,

- use” trainings

and and

system”,

CEU eTD Collection Corruption, Combating the Crime, MoneyLaundering, Crimes Cyber of Increasing Organized for Effectiveness Reforms Combat the Circulation the Increasing Drug Illicit and Trafficking Against of for Effectiveness Reforms Passport System New a of Introduction for Reforms Migration Granting The OfAdministration The Police Of Improvement For Exit And Foreigners Of Entry For And Citizenship, (Terminating) The Procedures Of Adjustment For Reforms Rights andfreedoms Citizens’ of Protection for Reforms Reform oftheTraffic Security Educational Reform Organizational and Reforms Structural Types the reforms of

Table 6 (B)

Police Reform ProgramforPolice Reform 2010

traffic security” “On tracking Law for locators GPS t road of for “installation autodrome an testing”, of Yerevan in “construction “update of thelibrary stock” “re app Institution”, of skills and knowledge the testing for criteria new of “application special uniform, necessary means with and weapons” Service Patrol the of “Provision Fingertip”, Population of Register State establishmen police, sin registration civil of “computerization of servants”, rules disciplinary internal of “Establishment ofactivitiesExamples prevention of service and providers law cooperation between internet “Developmenta legal package of of acts with police agencies “ addicts atcheckpoints.”, border“Medic “ Internet system.”, information process incorpor for system.”,“Automation ofthe information provision recommendations concerning theintroduction “ application f networks to reception”,citizens’ “Providing access through e and entry; acquisitionof citizenship “ “Development DraftaRA 'OnLaw new of prisons civicgroups monitoring “ raffic police vehicles”, “development of an RA Draft Draft RA an of “development vehicles”, police raffic Signingcombating agreements on andAcquisition ofdrug installation upoftheSum internationalorganizations’ ofRegular thefindings public discussion Introduction of ne

58 identified among prisonidentified population.” among

Amendments applicationthe 'single of

information on theprocedureinformation of or o e of t

cyber

citizenship andcitizenship residential status” -

- 2011. Source: OSCE 2011. equipment of specialized classrooms”, classrooms”, specialized of equipment w working methodsin iat t te oie Educational Police the to licants - ation of thevotersin list - crimes.” of EU a of “Establishment databases”,

to the RA Law “On ensuring ensuring “On Law RA the to

(termination), foreigners’exit enforcement

member s

and

al rehabilitation ofal drug rehabilitation reports”,

communication

- organized crime crime organized room' principle of room' principle

detection devices detection t ates.”,

bodies aimed atbodies aimed

on regulating

the process of the of

Wea

of the of the pons'.”

CEU eTD Collection Legal and Social Protection Officers’ Police of Improvement for Reforms Building Confidence inthe Police for Reforms and Organizations with the Cooperation of Improvement for Reforms

other Agencies Agencies other -

up Public Public up expansion oftheexpansion scope theservices. of “ officers’ contacts the massmedia.” with a public“Elaboration forum.”, of guidelines for police “ women and cooperation withcrisis the RAPolice st “Trainings inYerevan, Kapan Vanadzor, creationa consolidated of other into concernedagencies “ Capacity healthcare building of services Reconstruction of official thepolice Integration of thedatabases oflaw 59

children victims ofdomesticchildren violence.” victims aff dealing with

centers of for protection legal

information system.”,

a single environment,

juvenile matters on juvenile matters

enforcement

website tosetup website ”

and Gavar ofand Gavar and

and

CEU eTD Collection

Figure Georgia 6(A) PoliceInternal structure.Source: of Ministry Affairs 60

CEU eTD Collection

Beacháin, AbelÓ, and Polese. Donnacha BBC.“Huge GeorgiaLeader.” Against Rally Avagyan, andDuncan Gagik, Hiscock. Alesina, Alberto,Ardagna,and Silvia Trebbi Francesco Adalian, Rouben Paul. Frieden, A. Jeffry Freedom theWorld.” in House. “Freedom Fortin, “A Jessica. ToolEvaluate to State Capacityin Post Fernandez,Dani Raquel, Ro and ItEngvall, RoadStudies andWhat “Corruption Silk (2012). Johan. Means.” ——— IDirectorate General Lilli. Di Puppo, “Poli De Waal, Thomas. Law’Davison,L.Holmes. “‘Soft Remy,and Regimes and Europea Cornell, Svante E., and Frederick S. Starr. TimothyColton, and Robert Transformation C.Tucker,Late J., “Elite and eds. Soviet in GordonBuchanan, M.,and Tullock. James Börzel,and Pamuk. Tanja “Pathologies Yasemin A., of Europeanisation: Fighting http://www.cmi.no/publications/publication/?3748=police Practice Insight Networksand Corruption: andLinkages AgainstIn TerroristLaundering.” Financing and Money Asia Patterns i Post Constitutional Democracy theSouthernCorruption Caucasus.” in Republics: Failures Successes and http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7018698.stm. ment/b2ef71cd http://mercury.ethz.ch/serv 2005. http://www.nber.org/papers/w12049. EconomyPolitical ofReforms Latin America,Latin 1965 http://www.freedomhouse.org/report 2006.” 5 (December 1146 1,1991): PresenceIndividual of http://www.silkroadstudies.org/new/docs/silkroadpapers/1209Engvall.pdf. eorgia_One_EN.pdf. http://www.coe.int/t/ MayGRECO, 27,2011. orgia_EN.pdf. http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/greco/evaluations/round1/GrecoEval1(2001)5_Ge Georgia . Third EvaluationThird Round.Evaluation Report onGeorgia onIncriminations - - Soviet Transcaucasia,Soviet theRuling orWhatIn Happens Can’t Class Rule.” When Caucasus Institute Program, &Caucasus RoadStudies 2006. Silk European Journal of Political Research Political of European Journal . GRECO, June 15,2001. June . GRECO, n post Debt, Development,Debt, a

The Caucasus: AnIntroduction - 8180 -

ce Reform Georgia.an in in Anti Cracks 2010, no. 2(2010). 2010, no. Soviet Leadership –

Historical Dictionary ofArmeniaHistorical Legal Affairs -

dghl/monitoring/greco/evaluations/round3/GrecoEval3(2010)12_G - 4999

- 1985

Specific Uncertainty.”Specific . Vol. 100. University of Michigan Press,. Vol.100.University of 1965. 6. - iceengine/Files/ISN/19431/ipublicationdocument_singledocu adcf drik. “Resistance toReform:QuoBias inthe Status . Princeton UniversityPress, 1991. –

1155. doi:10.2307/2006910. . National Bureau of Economic. National Research, Bureau 2006. of BIBLIOGRAPHYLIST - . 55539bfb0e6e/en/SW_Armenia.pdf First Evaluation Round.Evaluation Evaluation First . Westview Pr,1995. . Westview . Vol.23.Routledge, Security ReforminArmenia Sector nd Democracy:Modern Economy Political and - The Colour Revolutions theFormerThe Colour in Soviet

types/freedom The Caucasus: aChallenge forEurope FreedomWebsite House The Calculus of Consent: Logical of The Calculus Foundations West Politics European 61 , 2007. BBC

, September 28, Europe.2007, sec. . Oxford University. Oxford USA,2010. Press, The American Economic Review The

49, no.5(2010): 654 . . 77.Scarecrow 2010. Press, - Who andWhen? Adjusts On the world. - commun

2010. Terrorism, OrganisedTerrorism, Crime - Successcorruption Story.” - reform

, 2013. n Organisations’ FightOrganisations’ n

ist Countries, 1989 ist 35, no.1(2012): 79 - in . -

– georgia. . Saferworld, . Report on 686.

. Central

81, no.

– – 97.

CEU eTD Collection

Giorgi “Georgian Sepashvili. Cabinet Approved.” Gelman, Vladimir Malesky.Gehlbach, J. ofVeto and“TheContribution Scott, Players Edmund toEconomic ——— Geddes,Barbara. Gallina, of Nicole. State Transformation: The “Puzzles Cases Georgia.” ofArmeniaand Kupatadze, Alexander. Georgia’s “Explaining Anti Kukhianidze, Alexandre. “Corruption andCrime inGeorgia Organized befor K Zoran,Krunić, and George S Kakachia,Liand Kornely, D.,and RodneyJ. Jobson, Schneck. “Constituent Views ofOrganizationalEffectiveness: andInfluencesJacoby, External Coalition, Substitution: on Wade. “Inspiration, Ivkovich,Integrity and Sanja Kutnjak, AleksandrKhechumyan. “The Police State of in INTERPOL.“Member International Group. Crisis House, theWorldReport.” Freedom.in “Freedom S Hellman, Joel “WinnersHellman, Take Joel. All.” Goodin, Robert E. opczyński Journal of Police Strategies &Journal ofPolice Strategies Management Armenia:the Findings from http://www.interpol.int/Member International December Group, 19, 2007. Crisis Freedom House 31, no.4(2003): 751 CaptureInfluence and inTransition Economies.” 9299.1982.tb00461.x. Whitehall.” http://www.civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=6227. building.” Reform.” California Press, 1994. Michigan 2003. Press, Comparative Politics http:/ Caucasian Review International Affairs of no. 1(2012): 16 ‘Rose Revolution’.” Sociological Review InternationalEurope Workshop. European Delegation Commission Georgia, to Tbilisi the Currentfor withthe Recommendations theReform.” Situation http://pipss.revues.org/3964. Post in Institutions More inGeorgia Successful inKyrgyzstan Than Russia?” or (March 25 1,1982): Evidence Police Organizations.” from Transformations.”Postcommunist . Politici /papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1876653. , MACIEJ. “The, MACIEJ. Second of Democr Generation Journal ofPolitics Democratization ., Geraint and Daniel Jones, Kaufmann.“Seize theState,Day: Seize State an’s Dilemma: America Capacity State inLatin Building Public Administration Paradigms and Sand Castles: TheoryParadigms andSandCastles: Researchdesign Building in . “Post “Rational and Rational Politicians Bureaucrats Washington in and

– (2008). 36. - States: Armenia.” - Soviet Societies. Pipss.Org - –

Soviet TransitionsSoviet andDemocratization: Theory Towards Central AsianSurveyCentral no. 129 (January 129 no. 1,2000): – . Analytical AnnArbor: PerspectivesPolitics. University on of 46. doi:10.2307/256022. am O’Shea. “Why Does Policeam Reform “WhyDoes O’Shea. toHave Appear Been

773. Georgia: Towards Authoritarianism Sliding

iradze. “The Ministry of Internal“TheAffairs ofiradze.of MinistryGeorgia

10, no.2(2003): 87

Police IntegrityPolice Survey.” 72, no.4(2010): 957 World Politics - Mogilany, 10 December countries/Europe/Armenia.

World Politics 60, no.1(1982): 23 INTERPOL The Academy ofManagementThe Journal Academy 62

28, no. 2 (2009): 215 28, no. 4, no. 1 (2010).

36, no. 1(2013): 70 36, no.

Civil.Ge Methodology Wa Section,

- 50, no.2(1998): 203 corruption Drive.”

no. 13(2012). – , 2013. 104.

Journal ofComparative EconomicsJournal 58, no. – 975. – 135. doi:10.2307/41274740.

, February 17,2004. Policing: An International Policing: AnInternational 34 (2005). atic and inEastern Elites Central –

41. doi:10.1111/j.1467 - 4 (2006): 623 12, 1999.”

The Journal ofPower

– –

234. 90. European Security European ? Report for the Report for –

. Vol.25.Univof Europe Report. 234.

Polish Polish

– shington, DC: DC: shington, e and afterthe 651.

- Report of Report

25, no.1 - -

21, CEU eTD Collection

Ministry ofGeorgia. ofJustice “About ofG Justice Ministry of Saakashvili.Mikhail Georgia’sInterview National Project. by PoliceCorruption Robert Matthew Devlin. Mark thePoliceCorruption in Pyman.“Arresting Kupatadze, Alexander, GavinSlade, and “Anti Molly Corso. Republican Party ofArmenia. “History ofthe Party.” Police o David L.Georgian in Phillips, Next “Corruption Cleanup.” Papava, Vladi “PoliceOSCE. Reform Programme2010 for “World Bank:OCCRP. GeorgiaIsAnti O’Dwyer,Branislav Conor, andKoval Ó Beacháin,Donnacha, Abel and Polese.“From Roses toBullets: The and Rise Decline of Nichol, Jim. Theof NationaltheRepubic of Assembly Ar Mody, Abiad. and Ashoka,Abdul Lincoln UnderstandingMitchell, “What theRose for? Revolution Was A. theGeorgian LincolnMitchell, “Democracy A. theRoseRevolution.” Since inGeorgia ——— for USInterests http://www.parliament.am/legislation.php?sel=show&ID=1271&lang=eng. police International3. 2003. MonetaryFund, http://academiccommons.columbia.edu/catalog/ac:139104. Revolution.” (2006): 669 http://www.justice.gov.ge/?sec_id=184&lang_id=ENG http://www.justice.gov.ge/index.php?lang_id=ENG&sec_id=1. Ministry ofJustice ofGeorgia http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4849472. Siegel.15, 2005. September NPR, ml?id=126. http://www.princeton.edu/successfulsocieties/content/focusareas/PL/policynotes/view.x Innovations 2010. Societies, for Successful defence.org/publicatio UK Transparency International Georgia”(2011). http://e Armenia Georgia February 5,2004.http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0205/p11s02 (2006): 657 http://www.osce.org/yerevan/68211. bank https://reportingproject.net/occrp/index.php/en/ccwatch/cc Reporting Pr Corruption 3 Europe.” Institutionaliz post – 26. About.” . “Giorgi Papuashvili: f Georgia.Internal“Ministry& Affairs: Structure of Functions.” - - Soviet Colour Revolutions” Colour Soviet (2009). http://doras.dcu.ie/15054/.

georgia , 2001. Armenia, Azerbaijan, Developments Implications andGeorgia: Political and , 2013.http://www.police.ge/index.php?m=195#&lng=eng. , 2012.http mer. “The Political Economy“ThePolitical mer. RoseRevolution.” ofGeorgia’s Studies in Comparative International Development (SCID) International DevelopmentStudies inComparative

– – Seizing the ReformGeorgia’s Police, Rebuilding Moment: Seizing 2004 667. 676. - Har ation and Second is - . DIANEPublishing, 2011. anti

vard Review International ://www.hhk.am/en/history/. - corruption ns/1431 - oject collection.library.ethz.ch/view/eth:3015. Financial Reform: WhatWhatFinancial Reform: ShapesIt? It? Shakes , February 2,2012. , 2013. - - arresting - , November http://www.ti 2012. generation Economic Reform in Postcommunist generation Reform Economic Postcommunist in success Ministry of Justice ofGeorgia \ vcík. “And the Last the Be “And First: Shall Partyvcík. System - Corruption Success Story.”

- - - menia. menia. 63 2011,” 2010. 2011,” story. corruption

(2008). (2008). -

TransparencyInternational The law ofthe republicThe law ofA

Website Party of ofthe Republican - in - the Christian ScienceChristian Monitor . -

cor - eorgia.” - police.

watch ruption Reforms in

Organized Crime and Organized , 2011. , 2011. -

- -

cogn.html. briefs/1324

Website ofthe

Website ofPolice of

41, no. 4(2007): 41, no. Orbis Orbis Defense

rmenia on 50, no.4

- 2006 50, no.4 world ,

.” . Vol. - CEU eTD Collection

Shahnazarian,“Police Nona. Georgia, Reform in andCorruption Armenia, Seawright, and JohnGerring. Techniques Jason, Selection A “Case inCase Research: Study Alan,andRousso, Franklin Steves. “The Effectiveness ofAnti “PoliticalRiker, William. ScienceIn and Rational Choice.” RIA Police BeIncreased Salaries Novosti. “Armenian Will by 40%.” Wheatley, Jonathan. Cory.Welt, “HowIs Strategic US the Wade, Robert. “The Sys Tsebelis, George. ——— TransparencyInternational. PerceptionIndex,” “Research: Corruption 2011. The JudiciaryArmenia. “Judges.” of TheRepublic ofArmenia. Government ofthe“Anticorruption Strategy.” Taylor, Brian D. Tamuna Karosanidze. “EightSvensson, Jakob. QuestionsAboutCorruption.” Supreme Courtof Georgia. “Judges.” “Measuring Shinn. Sun, Relative Efficiency Police the Precincts of Data Using Envelopment SPIEGEL. The Begins Lie?: West Saakashvili DoubtGeorgian to Leader.” “Did Government ofArmenia theRepublic of CambridgeUniversity Press, 2011. Implementation Perspectives http://www.supremecourt.ge/eng/judges/judges/. Analysis.” lie Online pdf http://www.gwu.edu/~ieresg Karabakh.” #232,September 2012. Memo Policy 1,2008):(June 294 Menu ofQualitativeQuantita and Handbook ontheEconomicsCorruption of Pre Institutionsof andDecisions. Cambridge Cambridge University [England]: Press, 1994. EconomyPolitical November 2004. http://www.interethnic.org/EngNews/301104_3.html. Transition in the FormerTransition Soviet Union http://home.gwu.edu/~cwelt/USGeorgiaStrategicPartnership.pdf. University,Columbia 2010. ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&AN=7142390. 03aabd3904f7%40sessionmgr112&vid=2&hid=124&bdata=JnNp http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?sid=70ac297b India.” South California Press, 1990. http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overview. http://www.transparency.org/res http://www.court.am/?l=en&id=29&mode=common_court. . “Research: PerceptionIndex,” Corruption 2012. - the liminary the Post from Evidence - , September 15, 2008. , September 15, 2008. west Socio - State Building in Putin’s Russia: in Policing andCoercionState Building begins Nested Games: inComparative Politics Nested RationalChoice 19, no. 3 (2005): 19 (2005): 19, no.3 Journal ofDevelopment Studies . Anti Georgia from N from Georgia - Economic Planning SciencesEconomic Planning National Anti National , edited by, edited E.Alt and Kenneth James A.Shepsle. PoliticalEconomy - tem of Administrative and Political Corruption: Canal Corruption: Political Irrigation ofAdministrative and tem in – to 308. doi:10.2307/20299733. - - Co doubt

rruption Resource2007. Center, - wu/assets/docs/ponars/pepm_232_Shahnazarian_Sept2012. georgian http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/did - ational Awakeningational Delayed Rose to Revolution: Corruption Strategy And Elaboration andAction Plan: Website Judiciary Fothe ofArmenia earch/cpi/overview. - Website ofGeorgia Court ofSupreme – Georgia Strategic Partnership?” HarrimanInstitute: Partnership?” Georgia Strategic tive Options.” 42.

- communist Transitioncommunist In Countries.”

- . Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., . Ashgate Publishing, 2005. leader , 2013.http://www.gov.am/ 64

, 247, 2007. - a

18, no.3(April 1982). - 36, no.1(2002): 51 36, 578273.html Political Research Quarterly Political

The Journal ofEcono

- f90b Perspectives on Positive on Perspectives

- - corruption Programs:corruption 45af

- a0da

RIA Novosti RIA dGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2 – en/anticorruption/. 71. Website ofthe after , 2013. , -

. University of

, 2013. and Nagorno

mic

International International Communism - saakashvili Spiegel Spiegel ,

61, no.2 -

. -

CEU eTD Collection

Wu, An Wu, WorldBank. Bank.World Sector “CPIAAccountability, Transparency,thePublic in and Corruption Capacity in East Asia: Japan, Taiwan, China and China Capacity Asia:Japan, inEast Vietnam Taiwan, Directions Development in http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IQ.CPA.TRAN.XQ Rating.” 2013. May Accessed 21, - chia. “State Capacity i Fighting Corruption in Public Services in Corruption Georgia’sFighting Chronicling Reforms n the RoC and PRC: aComparative andn theRoC PRC: In Perspective.” . Washington 2012. DC, 65

, 131 – 156, 2000.

State .