Abstract
Corruption is an old social phenomenon intrinsic to governments, individuals, organizations, and countries, bothdeveloped and developing. Despite sustained efforts of many states and international organizations to curb it,corruption as an ethical and legal problem still exists. The author aim at tackling the phenomena of corruption andresponsibility not only at a theoretical level but also with attempts to model possibilities fighting corruption andincreasing public servants responsibility.Paper starts with proposition that media role informing the public about corrupt behaviour of elected andappointed officials are controversial in Lithuania as it creates the feeling of helplessness, mistrust, etc. Detailedanalyses of various concept of corruption are provided together with conclusion on three developing tendenciestrying to define this social phenomenon. 1) Term was expanded from seeking private towards organizational orgroup benefit from the corrupt deal (personal/group interests). 2) Attention of researchers and practitioners movedfrom solely public towards private, non-profit sectors as well (traditional/modern definition). 3) The context of theproblem had changed together with globalisation and internationalisation processes (national/global). Political,administrative, private and international types of corruption are distinguished, naming several forms of corruptconduct (bribe, misuse of official position, conflict of interest, etc.). Social scientists approach the problem from two different methodological perspectives (moralistic andfunctional). Various researches suggest different theories trying to explain the corruption. Historical-culturalperspectives concentrate on political style and urbanization. Economists view the reasons of corruption inmisbalance between demand and supply, estimating level of risk and possible benefit. Organizational settings andpersonal values approaches provide other two opportunities to view the corrupt behaviour.Administrative corruption is influenced by the existing possibilities for public servant and personal inclinationsto benefit from them. Public servant duties require following a number of ethical principles and values(disinterestedness, openness, transparency, impartiality, serving the public interest, responsibility and accountability,etc.) in their day-to-day operations. Meanwhile principles of consuming society, which public servants are also partof, encourage the use of rather different principles (seeking self interest, using the possibilities, etc.). Such opposingpressures (market versus public interest orientation) create internal conflicts, which have a rather high price.Corruption has a negative impact of political, social-economical, cultural development of the society. Fightingcorruption can’t be the end in itself. Transparency International founder J.Pope who stresses 3 important purposesprovides the answer why such struggle is important: rule of law, higher life quality and conditions for societaldevelopment. Antipode of corruption can be the National Integrity System, which rest upon 11 elements. Favourableconditions (pay, incentives, labour relationship, etc.) for public servants activity, control and accountabilitymechanisms may increase their sensitivity towards unethical, corrupt practice. Legal and administrativeresponsibility may serve as preventive measure in public sector. Together with prevention, persecution, andanticorruption education are main directions fighting the corruption. To escape many negative consequences ofcorruption, government efforts should be shared and supported by the public and private sector.