This is a translation of the post that Inga wrote on our Russian version. In the article she writes on how lie detectors will be used in preventing corruption in Kyrgyz government.

Kyrgyz government decided to eradicate corruption using lie detectors. International donors are supposed to provide money for this experiment. The cost of every polygraph machine will vary from 2 to 6 thousand dollars. The officials to be tested are those from Kyrgyz customs and tax inspections.

According to Bahtyar Mambetov, national officer of UNDP on drugs and crime, who is also responsible for introducing lie detector in Kyrgyz official bodies:

“Polygraph is a useful tool which is instrumental in filtering candidates who don’t fit to work in official bodies. Using polygraphs we can detect whether an applicant has a tendency to lie or misuse his or her position. We can also test people’s psychological stability. For instance, when we were selecting candidates to fill a number of positions in the Drug’s Control State Agency we’ve sifted 30-35% of applicants on the basis of the data, received though screening them with polygraphs. ”

It seems to be worth cheering this innovation but there are a number of concerns regarding the whole procedure and its outcomes. The matter is that due to the lack of finances, there is a plan to screen only selected officials. Supposedly, it is the head of every state body who is going to be responsible for designating stuff members to undergo the screening. As the head of the National Agency on Preventing Corruption Ulugbek Karmyshakov commented on this case:

“On the first place I would suggest testing those, who occupy certain positions. For instance, in Tax Inspection Agency it’s necessary to screen the department of external control that dealswith controlling different businesses in the country. In this case we don’t need to screen, say, accountants. It will help saving money. I think we also need to pay attention at the health situation of those chosen for screening, but this is really up to specialists. ”

As one may observe, the practice of double standards is in action again. In the case with lie detectors there is, definitely, room for misdeeds. For example, it’s very possible that with such selectivity and in order to save money, selection committees will fail to trap corrupt officials, who are may be sitting in the departments, not directly dealing with money flows. Another question is how to asses the health situation when it is contra-indicated to spell out the truth?

In general ,the government initiative to test state officials with lie detectors sparked heated public discussions. It is obvious, that some measures are to be undertaken immediately, since Kyrgyzstan, according to the latest data, occupies position “130” among 159 countries, when it comes to the level of corruption. The question, though, is whether introducing lie detectors will be efficient enough endeavor for spotting corrupt officials. For some reason it was also taken for granted that high level officials will only be responsible for designating their subordinates to undergo screening process and will not be subjected to it themselves. Don’t you think that it’s a strange decision for those who are really serious about anti corruption measures in Kyrgyzstan?