3.Court cases

In 2015, some evident coercive pressure on the economy emerged in the form of an increased number of court cases dealing with administrative offenses in the economic sphere. According to the Supreme Court, the number of cases increased from 9792 in 2014 to 13,361 in 2015. Along with that, the major contributors to the coercive pressure on the national economy in 2014 and 2015 were the Ministry of Taxes and Duties—correspondingly 6804 and 9060 cases, the State Customs Committee—466 and 651 cases, the Ministry of Internal Affairs—446 and 415 cases, and the State Control Committee—357 and 398 cases.

In addition, there has been a rise in the percentage of cases resulting in administrative penalties to the overall number of cases filed in court: a total of 88% in 2014 and 90% in 2015, including cases related to the Ministry of Taxes and Duties—91 and 92%, the State Control Committee—85 and 88%, the State Customs Committee—47 and 73%, and the Ministry of Internal Affairs—69 and 66%. Only a few appeals were satisfied in whole or in part against the action or inaction of officials and verification of legality. Moreover, the number of appeals has been decreasing since 2013. A total of 102 decisions were challenged in court as appeals against actions of officials of the Ministry of Taxes and Duties in 2013; 12 claims were satisfied in whole or in part. In 2015, the corresponding figures were 78 and 6. Regarding the State Customs Committee, the numbers were 168 and 78 in 2013, and 112 and 6 in 2015.

A year-long comparison of the overall quantity of initiated criminal cases related to economic offenses shows a steady increase in the number: 2129 cases in 2012, 2639 in 2013, 2867 in 2014, and 3580 in 2015. The number of administrative cases related to economic offenses has also been growing: 111,421 cases in 2012, 121,052 in 2013, 121,371 in 2014, and 128,005 in 2015.

For Belarus, getting out of this trap means decentralizing state regulation of the economy as well as strengthening and promoting independence and material incentives for state institutions to bring in result-oriented professionals. Better information in addition to more openness and transparency are critical, as are keeping

decision-making out of the hands of individuals, engendering trust, and building respect. Authority has to be delegated to ministries, departments, and sections in keeping with the principle that simpler problems can be solved farther down the food chain. Dividing up the regulatory and economic functions of state agencies needs to happen, putting ministries in charge of industries and more general areas without responsibility for the economy on the micro level.

The state would be wise to deprioritize the letter of the law when it comes to monitoring compliance with the rules governing business (something that is undoubtedly important in an institutional economy). As it sets up institutions and oversees the development of the economy, most important is for Belarus to ensure currency and financial stability by prioritizing tax- and currency-related crimes (though punishing them cannot be used as a means to other ends). Relaxing control, especially over small and medium business, would create space for them to experiment, try new approaches and methods, test new suppliers and clients, and breathe life into the economy. Once changes have been made to economic structures, control can be adapted to those new forms and fully reinstated.
