The experience of normative-legal fixation of violations of «anticorruption standards» and response measures to them in Ukraine is analyzed. Attention is paid, on the example of violations of «gift» prohibitions and restrictions, restrictions concerning «external» activity, joint service of close persons, abuse of official position and public authority, «ex-service» restrictions and prohibitions, peculiarities of using two models of consolidation of legal response measures for their violations (monomodel, polymodel). The use of the resource of each model allows ensuring the formation of a variety of measures of both mono-branch response (measures of criminal-law response) and poly-branch response (measures of criminal-law and administrative-law response), with different variants of their ratio. «Dominant» in the conditions of modern law-making processes in the field of «anti-corruption standardization» is a poly-branch model. This allows to ensure the adequacy of the state response to all variety of violations of «anti-corruption standards» by public servants and «exofficials », a variety of measures of such response (fines, confiscation, special confiscation, deprivation of a special right - the right to hold positions of public service, etc.), effectiveness of prevention of corruption deeds. The alternativeness of sanctions allows responding to the entire diversity of offences of public servants, misdemeanours with qualified and privileged compositions, taking into account all the conditions, causes, etc. Interdependence of the nature of an unlawful deed of a public servant and measure (measures) of legal response ensures the relevance of state response to relevant manifestations of «corrosion» of public authority. Problem phenomena in law enforcement in this area of public relations are due to the «quality» of fixing «anti-corruption standards», «external factors» in the very process of determining the type and amount of measure of legal response to violations of «anticorruption standards» by public servants.