Global Integrity Report

Azerbaijan Home

Timeline

Notebook

Integrity Scorecard

2009 Assessment

Azerbaijan: Integrity Indicators Scorecard

Azerbaijan: Integrity Scorecard Report > Sub-Category: Executive Accountability
Indicators		Score
26	In law, can citizens sue the government for infringement of their civil rights?	100
27	Can the chief executive be held accountable for his/her actions?	50
28	Is the executive leadership subject to criminal proceedings?	100
29	Are there regulations governing conflicts of interest by the executive branch?	38
30	Can citizens access the asset disclosure records of the heads of state and government?	0
31	In practice, official government functions are kept separate and distinct from the functions of the ruling political party.	0

Indicator and sub-Indicator Details

In law, can citizens sue the government for infringement of their civil rights?

26: In law, can citizens sue the government for infringement of their civil rights?

Score:

YES

Comments: Under Article 60 of the Constitution, judicial protection of the rights and liberties is guaranteed and everyone may sue the government for infringement of their civil rights.

References: The Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan [ LINK ]

Can the chief executive be held accountable for his/her actions?

27a: In practice, the chief executive gives reasons for his/her policy decisions.

Score:

100

Comments: In practice, the chief executive and other ministers issue directives and decisions behind the scenes and rarely provide a rationale for their decisions publicly. They rarely take critical questions from journalists or opposition parties. The government and government-run media routinely sensor such sessions. Journalists of independent or opposition newspapers who cover these issues may face threats and persecutions.

References: 1) Anti-Corruption Law: Lessons for Former Soviet Countries from Azerbaijan, B.Michael, Linacre College, N.Mishyna, Odessa National Law Academy [ LINK ] 2) 2008 Report of the Commission for Combating Corruption on Implementation of the National Strategy (2007-2011) for Increasing Transparency and Combating Corruption [ LINK ] 3) GRECO (Group of States against Corruption) Compliance Report on Azerbaijan, 2008, [ LINK ] 4) US State Department Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, 2008 Human Rights Report on Azerbaijan, Feb. 25, 2009, [ LINK ] 5) Newspaper materials and articles of the Radio Liberty-Azerbaijan [ LINK ]

27b: In law, the judiciary can review the actions of the executive.

Score:

YES

Comments: Article 60 of the Constitution broadly ensures everyone's right to go to court against the decisions, actions (or inactions) of the public agencies. Furthermore, under Article 296 of the Code of Civil Procedure, any interested party may start a proceeding regarding decisions and actions (inactions) of the executive. Article 25.2 of relevant Code stipulates that judicial review of agency decisions is implemented by courts of general jurisdiction -- in other words, district courts as first instance courts in a special proceeding so called special claim. Under Article 6 of the Law on Complaining to Courts against Decisions and Actions (Inactions), Violating Rights and Liberties of Citizens, the judiciary can pass judgments on the legality of actions taken by the executive.

However, under Article 130 of the Constitution, the constitutionality of actions taken by the executive can be considered only by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

References: The Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan; The Law on Complaining to Courts against Decisions and Actions (Inactions), Violating Rights and Liberties of Citizens; The Code of Civil Procedure [ LINK ]

27c: In practice, when necessary, the judiciary reviews the actions of the executive.

Score:

100

Comments: Under Azerbaijani legislation, the legality of executive actions can be reviewed by ordinary courts while the constitutionality of executive actions can be reviewed by the Constitutional Court. In practice, courts do not tend to pass judgments on executive abuses. However, it sometimes happens, unless it is a politically sensitive case, but enforcement of the favorable decision may still remain problematic. As to reviewing the constitutionality of executive actions, according to the statistics provided by the Constitutional Court there are only a handful cases when the Constitutional Court has reviewed the executive actions. A study shows that in practice the Constitutional Court mostly reviews the constitutionality of judiciary and legislative acts, not the executive acts.

References: 1) Website of the Constitutional Court of Azerbaijan [ LINK ] 2) Interview with Sevinj Aliyeva, advocate, September 2009, 3) US State Department Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, 2008 Human Rights Report on Azerbaijan, Feb. 25, 2009, [ LINK ] 4) Newspaper materials and articles of the Radio Liberty-Azerbaijan [ LINK ]

27d: In practice, the chief executive limits the use of executive orders for establishing new regulations, policies, or government practices.

Score:

100

Comments: Under Article 113 of the Constitution, establishing general procedures, the president of the Republic of Azerbaijan issues decrees; as per all other questions, he issues orders. If not specified otherwise in decrees and orders, they become effective from the day of their publication. It should also be noted that laws after being passed by legislature shall be signed by the president with his decree. Since in Azerbaijan most Parliament members are ruling party representatives as well as pro-government "independents" (there are only 10 opposition members out of 125 members), the legislature never goes against the will of the president and in this regard there is no need for the president to struggle with the Parliament. Generally, new policies are implemented by legislature acts, and executive acts are usually issued to implement and to provide more practical provisions for the legislative acts. For instance, executive acts may define which agency is responsible for the implementation of the law and provide other implementing norms.

References: 1) Interview with Sevinj Aliyeva, advocate, September 2009, 2) GRECO (Group of States against Corruption) Compliance Report on Azerbaijan, 2008, [ LINK ] 3) US State Department Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, 2008 Human Rights Report on Azerbaijan, Feb. 25, 2009, [ LINK ] 4) Newspaper materials and articles of the Radio Liberty-Azerbaijan [ LINK ]

Is the executive leadership subject to criminal proceedings?

28a: In law, the heads of state and government can be prosecuted for crimes they commit.

Score:

YES

Comments: Under Article 107 of the Constitution, the head of state can be prosecuted for crimes committed. Under this provision, if the president of the Republic of Azerbaijan commits grave crimes, the question of removal of the president from his/her post can be submitted to the Parliament (Milli Majlis) at the initiative of the Constitutional Court based on the opinion of the Supreme Court presented within 30 days. The president may be dismissed from his/her post by the decision of the Parliament taken by 95 out of 125 votes. This decision shall be signed by the chairman of the Constitutional Court. If the Constitutional Court fails to sign the decision within one week, it shall not come into force. The decision of removal of the president from his/her office must be taken within two months from the date of application of Constitutional Court to Parliament. In case of failure, the criminal charge against the president is considered rejected.

Under Article 123 of the Constitution, the prime minister may be arrested if he/she is caught while committing crime. In this case, the relevant body should immediately inform the General Prosecutor of the Republic of Azerbaijan about it. Immunity of the prime minister may be lifted only by the president of the Republic of Azerbaijan based on application of the General Prosecutor. As it is seen, in respect to the head of government, there is some control of the executive branch on lifting immunity.

References: The Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan [ LINK ]

28b: In law, ministerial-level officials can be prosecuted for crimes they commit.

Score:

YES

Comments: Articles 107 and 123 of the Constitution regulate immunity and immunity-lifting procedure for the president and the prime minister of the Republic of Azerbaijan respectively. The Constitution does not specifically talk about ministerial-level officials. In this regard, ministerial-level officials can be prosecuted for crimes they commit on general grounds without any specific procedure.

References: The Constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan [ LINK ]

Are there regulations governing conflicts of interest by the executive branch?

29a: In law, the heads of state and government are required to file a regular asset disclosure form.

Score:

YES

Comments: Under Article 5 of the Law on Combating Corruption, public officials should file regular asset disclosure forms, illustrating sources, types, and amount of income, stock holdings, taxable properties, and other assets. Article 3.1 of the Law on Approval of the Rules on Filing Financial Data by Public Officials stipulates that among others, the president and the prime minister shall file asset disclosure forms to the Commission on Combating Corruption.

References: The Law on Combating Corruption; The Law on Approval of the Rules on Filing Financial Data by Public Officials [ LINK ]

29b: In law, ministerial-level officials are required to file a regular asset disclosure form.

Score:

YES

Comments: Under Article 5 of the Law on Combating Corruption, public officials should file regular asset disclosure forms, illustrating sources, types, and amount of income, stock holdings, taxable properties, and other assets. Article 3.1 of the Law on Approval of the Rules on Filing Financial Data by Public Officials stipulates that among others, ministerial-level officials are required to file an asset disclosure form to the Commission on Combating Corruption.

References: The Law on Combating Corruption; The Law on Approval of the Rules on Filing Financial Data by Public Officials [ LINK ]

29c: In law, there are regulations governing gifts and hospitality offered to members of the executive branch.

Score:

YES

Comments: Under Article 14 of the Law on Rules of Ethics Conduct of Civil Servants, a civil servant shall not demand or accept any gifts for himself/ herself or other persons which may influence or appear to influence the impartial performance of his/her duties, or may be or appear to be reward relating to his/her duties or might create an impression of such influence, or are given as reward for performance of his/her duties, or might create an impression of such reward. This rule shall not apply to cases of awarding minor gifts in regard to hospitality and with a value not over the amount described in the Law on Combating Corruption. In addition, Article 8 of the Law on Combating Corruption stipulates that public officials may not solicit or accept multiple gifts from any natural or legal persons during any 12 month period where the aggregate value of the gifts exceeds 55 Azeri manats (US$65). Gifts received above this limit shall be considered as belonging to the public authority or municipal body in which that official is performing his/her service duties. Under the Law, if a civil servant is not able to decide whether to take or refuse the gift, or benefit from the hospitality or not, he/she shall get his/her direct supervisor's opinion about it.

References: The Law on Rules of Ethics Conduct of Civil Servants; The Law on Combating Corruption [ LINK ]

29d: In law, there are requirements for the independent auditing of the executive branch asset disclosure forms (defined here as ministers and heads of state and government).

Score:

YES

Comments: Article 5 of the Law on Combating Corruption and Article 3.1 of the Law on Approval of the Rules on Filing Financial Data by Public Officials state that among others, ministers and heads of state and government should file regular asset disclosure forms to the Commission on Combating Corruption. However, the legislation does not define an independent auditing of the executive branch asset disclosure forms. Under Article 8 of the latter Law, the Commission itself controls the accuracy of the information submitted.

References: The Law on Combating Corruption; The Law on Approval of the Rules on Filing Financial Data by Public Officials [ LINK ]

29e: In law, there are restrictions on heads of state and government and ministers entering the private sector after leaving the government.

Score:

YES

Comments: The Law on Combating Corruption does not address this issue. However, the Draft Law on Prevention of Conflict of Interests in the Activity of Public Officials, which is now under the consideration in Parliament, may regulate restrictions for heads of state/ government and ministers to take positions in the private sector after leaving the government.

References: The Law on Combating Corruption [ LINK ]

29f: In practice, the regulations restricting post-government private sector employment for heads of state and government and ministers are effective.

Score:

100

Comments: Since there is no formal restriction for post-government private sector employment, efficiency cannot be evaluated. It should be noted that, in fact, the majority of senior officials have illegal private businesses even while they are in the office, and they keep them after leaving the government.

References: 1) Anti-Corruption Law: Lessons for Former Soviet Countries from Azerbaijan B.Michael, Linacre College, N.Mishyna, Odessa National Law Academy [ LINK ] 2) 2008 Report of the Commission for Combating Corruption on Implementation of the National Strategy (2007-2011) for Increasing Transparency and Combating Corruption [ LINK ] 3) GRECO (Group of States against Corruption) Compliance Report on Azerbaijan, 2008 [ LINK ] 4) US State Department Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, 2008 Human Rights Report on Azerbaijan, Feb. 25, 2009 [ LINK ] 5) Newspaper materials and articles of the Radio Liberty-Azerbaijan [ LINK ]

29g: In practice, the regulations governing gifts and hospitality offered to members of the executive branch are effective.

Score:

100

Comments: Despite the formal requirements, in practice the regulations governing gifts and hospitality to members of the executive branch are routinely ignored and unenforced.

29h: In practice, executive branch asset disclosures (defined here as ministers and above) are audited.

Score:

100

Comments: Despite the formal requirements, in practice asset disclosure provisions have not yet been implemented.

Can citizens access the asset disclosure records of the heads of state and government?

30a: In law, citizens can access the asset disclosure records of the heads of state and government.

Score:

YES

Comments: Under Article 9 of the Law on Approval of the Rules on Filing Financial Data by Public Officials, asset disclosure records submitted by public officials are considered confidential private life information, and therefore citizens cannot access the asset disclosure records of the heads of state and government. The Law says that responsible entrusted authorities shall ensure the privacy of those records. They may be requested by the Commission on Combating Corruption based on the decision of the General Prosecutor or the court in case of corruption related offenses.

References: The Law on Approval of the Rules on Filing Financial Data by Public Officials [ LINK ]

30b: In practice, citizens can access the asset disclosure records of the heads of state and government within a reasonable time period.

Score:

100

Comments: Despite the formal requirements, in practice asset disclosure provisions have not been implemented yet. Even if they are implemented, they will not be publicly accessible, because under Article 9 of the Law on Approval of the Rules on Filing Financial Data by Public Officials, asset disclosure records submitted by public officials are considered confidential private life information, and, accordingly, citizens cannot access them. Therefore, timeliness cannot be evaluated.

30c: In practice, citizens can access the asset disclosure records of the heads of state and government at a reasonable cost.

Score:

100

30d: In practice, the asset disclosure records of the heads of state and government are of high quality.

Score:

100

$Scoring Criteria :: 100 Score Criteria: The asset disclosure records of the heads of state and government are complete and detailed, providing the public with an accurate and updated accounting of the individuals\' sources of income, investments, and other financial interests. <p>50 Score Criteria: The asset disclosure records of the heads of state and government contain some useful information but may be lacking important details, including politically sensitive investment or other financial arrangements in which the individual has an interest. <p>0 Score Criteria: The asset disclosure records of the heads of state and government are overly general, lack any meaningful detail, and do not provide a clear accounting of the individuals\' sources of income, investments, and other financial assets.$

Comments: Despite the formal requirements, in practice asset disclosure provisions have not been implemented yet. But it should be noted that even if they are implemented, they will not be publicly accessible, because under Article 9 of the Law on Approval of the Rules on Filing Financial Data by Public Officials, asset disclosure records submitted by public officials are considered confidential private life information and, accordingly, citizens cannot access them. Quality issues cannot therefore be evaluated.

In practice, official government functions are kept separate and distinct from the functions of the ruling political party.

31: In practice, official government functions are kept separate and distinct from the functions of the ruling political party.

Score:

100

Comments: The government bureaucracy is an extension of the ruling party. There are almost no boundaries between government and party activities. Government funds, equipment and personnel are regularly used to support party activities.