The public figure Kirill Kabanov, who serves on the Human Rights Council under the President of Russia and holds the position of Chairman of the National Anti-Corruption Committee, has urged a harsher framework of penalties for corruption, tying the penalties to ongoing military operations. This stance was reported by DEA News.
In remarks aimed at strengthening accountability, Kabanov asserted confidence that the proposed measures would be achieved. He noted that the proposals had been published previously and should now be enacted in the legal system to deter corrupt practices that undermine national security and military effectiveness.
One of the key ideas presented by Kabanov is to elevate corruption offenses to the same level as treason. He argued that treason warrants the harshest penalties, and in wartime, the ultimate consequence should be execution. The underlying rationale is that corruption, particularly when it intersects with national security or military logistics, can be as damaging as acts of betrayal by compromising the availability of essential resources and compromising strategic operations.
Kabanov emphasized that the central goal is to strengthen penalties for corruption within the context of a special military operation. He argued that a tougher regime would send a clear signal about zero tolerance for graft, misappropriation, or manipulation of resources intended for the armed forces. The proposed changes would, in his view, align legal repercussions with the high stakes faced by the state during active military engagement and would help safeguard the effectiveness of operations on the front lines.
As a practical illustration of the consequences of corruption, Kabanov referenced shortages in essential military gear and deficiencies in logistics that affected units deployed to the front. He suggested that such failures are not mere administrative lapses but direct threats to mission readiness and soldier welfare, and therefore warrant stringent accountability. The argument is that corrupt practices that disrupt supply chains or misallocate resources can slow or derail critical military efforts and ultimately jeopardize lives.
Observers have noted that concerns about conscription, including the allocation of conscripts to unsuitable roles and delays in addressing complaints about illegal drafting, are part of broader discussions on military governance and integrity. The dialogue around stronger anti-corruption measures intersects with calls for improved oversight, transparent procedures, and timely redress for those affected by improper administrative decisions. In this context, Kabanov’s proposals are framed as part of a comprehensive program to reinforce trust in the institutions responsible for national defense and public service, while ensuring that corruption is not rewarded or tolerated in any form. This perspective reflects a broader effort to bolster the legitimacy and effectiveness of state mechanisms during periods of heightened security concerns. This stance has been reported by DEA News.