Posted on

Strengthening the Budget control in Local Self-Government

Institute Alternative organized a seminar “Strengthening the Budget control in Local Self-Government” on 25 and 26 March 2011, with the support of the Canada Fund. Central topics of the seminar were possibilities for strengthening the control of the budget and external audit at the local level.

Seminar was organized for the members of the committees in the local assemblies and secretariats for budget and finances in municipalities which were selected for this research project: Nikšić, Danilovgrad, Podgorica and Herceg Novi. Representatives of the media and NGOs also participated in the seminar.

Lecturers on the seminar were: Mr. Aleksandar Damjanović, president of the Committee on economy, finance and budget in the Parliament of Montenegro, Mr. Nikola Vukićević, Head of the Sector 5 in the State Audit Institution and Ms. Žana Đukić, Counselor for local self-government financing in the Union of Municipalities of Montenegro.

Posted on

Control of selecting commercial auditors required

The process of selecting commercial auditors in local self-governaments in Montenegro is not transparent and adequately controlled. This is one of the findings from the research “Strengthening the Budget Control in Local Self-Government”, which Institute Alternative conducted with the support of the Canada Fund.

The level of transparency is limited by the selection procedure. Given that these are usually low – value services, procedure that is usually used is the shopping method. It involves the submission of requests for proposals to be sent to at least three potential bidders. Decisions on awarding of the contracts is given applying the lowest available price criterion. On the other hand, alderman in the local assemblies have no influence in the selection of commercial auditors which limits their supervisory and control function when it comes to budget execution.

International standards require that after three years a new commercial auditor should be selected. This is also the recommendation of the Montenegrin State Audit Institution. However, in some municipalities, audit is done by the same commercial auditor for years. Sometimes it happens that the selection takes place without a public procurement procedure. This brings into question the objectivity of the auditor’s findings.

We belive that quality and experience should be the main criterion for selection of commercial auditors, not the lowest available price as it is currently the case.

Careful selection of a commercial auditor is necessary to increase oversight and control in spending public money on local level. Objective and transparent selection of commercial auditors is particularly important because State Audit Institution does not have the sufficient capacity to perform control of a significant number of local budgets per year. It is also evident that a regular revision of all local budgets will not be established in due time. We believe that the State Audit Institution as the supreme control organ of public money spending should be included in the selection process of commercial audit at the local level, as well as the alderman in municipal assemblies.

Milica Popović
Project Associate

Posted on

Surveillance measures restricting human rights

Democratic control of ANB’s measures necessary

Secret surveillance in any form represent a restriction of human rights and MPs must act on amending the Law on National Security Agency (ANB), which refers to the process of their approval, stated Stevo Muk, from the Institute Alternative.

He said that certain amendments to the Law on ANB allow for greater efficiency of the Agency in carrying out activities within its jurisdiction. “However, a number of legal solutions remain blurred, and as such can produce problems in practice”, said Muk to agency MINA.

Institute alternative believes that the MPS have missed the opportunity for precisely regulating the type of information contained by the ANB’s annual reports in the Law on Parliamentary Oversight of the Security and Defence Sector.

ANB’s internal control is weak and disorganized

Muk says it is especially important to note that the ANB must report on its activities in the fight against organized crime and corruption, in a way that would not compromise its work.

“ANB’s Internal control is weak and inadequately regulated. We believe that amendments to the Law must necessary prescribe the duty of preparing and submitting annual reports of the Inspector General of the Agency. The possibility of suspending the work of the Inspector General should be abolished”, said Muk.

Commenting on the changes to the law relating to the possibility of secret surveillance, Muk said that these measures are always and in any form a restriction of human rights.

“However, their application is a necessary evil in modern democratic societies, because of the need to protect the higher good of national security, and combating corruption, organized crime and a range of security issues,” said Muk.

Expanding ANB’s jurisdiction requires a serious discussion

Institute Alternative believes that expanding the jurisdiction of ANB and extending types of surveillance measures at its disposal requires a more detailed explanation of the proposer and serious discussion in the Committee.

“MPs must act on the part of the Law on ANB relating to the process of approval of secret surveillance measures and reporting to the Committee about them”, stated Muk.

He said that legislative initiatives such as this one should motivate MPs to fully utilize competencies from the Rules of Procedure and the new law on parliamentary oversight in their future work. “In order exercises democratic control over these and other measures that the ANB uses in its work,” Muk said.

Institute supports the proposal of the Committee for Security and Defense member Predrag Bulatović, who sought the withdrawal of changes in Law on ANB and opening a wider debate on proposed solutions.

“We think that would be a good opportunity to organize a consultative hearing, at which the protector of human rights and freedoms, the Agency for the Protection of Personal Data, NGOs and other interested stakeholders could give their opinion on expansion of the scope of secret surveillance measures and other issues related to amendments to the Law on ANB”, said Muk.

Portal Vijesti, 25. 02. 2011.

Posted on

Does the National council for European integration have the capacity to be a strategic consultative body within the European integration process?

The National council for European integration (NSEI) still shows its unreadiness to assume an active role within the European integration process. This impression stems from the discussion during the first NSEI’s session in 2011, together with statements from that session. It is evident that there was a lack of constructive debate about the most important issues for NSEI’s functioning – mechanisms for improvement of its capacities. This improvement should ensure that NSEI can take over one of the crucial positions within the EU integration process. Therefore, the NSEI constantly fails to initiate recommendations for overcoming some of the central obstacles in its functioning. This conclusion is confirmed after taking into consideration NSEI’s guidelines for improvement of the integration process. Remark refer to the attitudinal acceptance of the Action plan for Monitoring Implementation of Recommendations given in European Commission’s Opinion by this institution, without any concrete recommendation for its improvement during the preparation and adoption phase.

Considering the Action plan for Monitoring Implementation of Recommendations given in European Commission’s Opinion, after a public debate, improvements are evident in all parts of this plan, except in the part which refers to the Parliament of Montenegro. These improvements came after incorporation of suggestions and recommendations coming from NGOs and the EU. Therefore, it is unclear why Action plan for enhancement of legislative and control role of the Parliament of Montenegro for the period of November 2010 – November 2011 was not a subject of the public debate, while this documents needs improvement in various segments. It should be noted that Parliament’s Action plan fails to define some crucial elements which refer to the development of control mechanisms over the Government as well as the work of the NSEI and the Committee for International Relations and European integration. In addition, Parliament’s Action plan lacks clearly defined indicators which are necessary for monitoring the success in enhancement of central legislative institution’s capacities.

Having in mind limited administrative capacities of the NSEI, which were clearly highlighted by the European Commission, it crucially important to define mechanisms for improving them as soon as it possible. We believe those might be a part of the Strategy for development of human resources in the Parliament of Montenegro for the period January 2011 – December 2013. It is also possible to anticipate mechanisms for development of human resource capacities within the scope of a separate plan/document.

The NSEI has to show its political maturity and initiative in order to fulfill abovementioned. This is the only way for NSEI to become an active and strategically important participant within the accession process of the country to the EU.

Jovana Marović

Senior Researcher of the Institute Alternative

Posted on

Letter to Mr. Igor Lukšić – Draft text of the additional Government’s conclusions

The Government of Montenegro

President

Mr. Igor Lukšić

Dear Mr. Lukšić,

Institute Alternative participated in the public debate about the Action Plan to monitor the implementation of recommendations from the European Commission’s Opinion and prepared comments on the draft of this plan. The comments were timely submitted to the Ministries in charge and the Delegation of the European Union to Montenegro, as well as the coordinator of the entire process – the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and European Integration.

As direct participants in the process of preparing the Action Plan, we believe that is very important that the Government at this stage practically demonstrates its willingness to allow the civil society to play an active role in the process of EU integration. Therefore, we propose that the Government prepares a document / report from the public debate with an overview of all proposals, suggestions and recommendations that were submitted during the process. The report should also contain answers to why some proposals have been accepted and included in the final Action Plan and why others were not. In this way, the Government would provide a feedback to the participants of the public debates.

The Action Plan should, after improvements and inclusion of all constructive proposals that came both from civil society and representatives of the European Union, be a good starting point for the implementation of recommendations from the European Commission’s Avis. However, activities and established timeframe for their realization do not constitute a sufficient basis for meeting the recommendations if the sub activities and contents of the strategic legal framework of the reform are not timely and adequately established. Hence, in favor of the realization of seven key priorities for EU membership negotiations, it is necessary to ensure transparency of the process, include all interested stakeholders in the process of defining public policies and strengthen mechanisms for effective monitoring.

We believe that the mechanisms for implementing the Action Plan and effective monitoring could be enhanced by introducing an obligation of the Government to prepare regular monthly reports on the implementation of measures contained in this document. If the Government accepts this proposal, it should prepare seven monthly reports on the implementation of identified measures by September. It is only this way that the public will have direct access to real progress in achieving goals set by the EC.

We also suggest that the first Government’s session of every month until 01 September should be dedicated to the implementation of the Action Plan through a discussion of monthly reports. Besides a strong symbolic importance of commitment to the process of European integration, this would strongly confirm the duty of all responsible entities to report with full attention. This would also fully implement and further strengthen your commitment to personally coordinate this process, as you have stated in your keynote speech.

Attached is the draft text of the additional Government’s conclusions.

We hope that our proposals meet your approval,

Kindest regards,

Stevo Muk

President of Institute Alternative’s Managing Board

Proposed draft text of the additional Government’s conclusions:

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration is tasked to prepare and publish the report on the public debate on the draft Action Plan which will include an overview of all proposals, suggestions and recommendations that were submitted as well as rationale to why some proposals were accepted and others have not.

Ministries are tasked with providing the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration with monthly reports on implementation of measures from the Action Plan by the end of each month, during implementation of the Action Plan.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration is tasked with preparing an overall report on implementation of the Action Plan for the first Government’s session in each month.

The Government will reserve the first point on the agenda of each first session in the month for the discussion on the monthly report on implementation of the Action Plan.

The Government recommends that the Parliament of Montenegro and other responsible entities identified by the Action Plan prepare monthly reports on implementation of measures under the Action Plan and submit them the Government

Posted on

Montenegro under the watchful eyes of Đukanović and EU

Change is coming to Montenegro slowly, laboriously and unwillingly. The fact that Igor Lukšić is the Prime Minister is still less relevant than the fact that Milo Đukanović, who is not a Prime Minister, remains politically the most important and influential person in the country.

The new Prime Minister introduced the practice of communicating and cooperating with the opposition, non-governmental actors and other representatives of the society. He also demonstrated a new political sensibility in his approach to social problems, his attitude, and his work methods. Yet, his premiership remains in Đukanović’s shadow. In this context, it is unclear whether Lukšić is at all trying to achieve a certain degree of autonomy in decision-making, and when could that happen.

The process of European integrations, i.e. the principle of conditionality, is the key factor in accelerating reforms.

Without a strong influence of the international community (EU and USA), in synergy with a strengthening role for independent and professional media and NGOs, reforms whose pace would depend on the Government alone would be doomed to stagnate. This much is evident from the intensity of the reform efforts undertaken, albeit mostly in the legal sphere, in an extremely short period under the pressure of living up to the seven recommendations of the European Commission.

With the same people in government for so long, the line separating the leading DPS party from the state itself disappeared. Consequently, regular institutions, norms and practices are not functioning or are doing very poorly in a political context that had been frozen for decades. The most obvious examples of poor results concern the fight against corruption and development of a professional public administration – two areas that are fundamental to the structure of political elite

Major decisions which are crucial for further economic development of Montenegro are delayed or avoided altogether, and the Government failed to rally public support for its proposals and make the citizens believe in transparency and accountability of these processes.

There is much internal struggle within DPS, gradually pitting Đukanović on the one side against Marović and Vujanović on the other. On the surface, the most obvious differences concern identity issues, with Ranko Krivokapić, president of SDP, acting as an explicit interpreter of the politics of the president of DPS. In the meantime, the internal (interest-based) chasms are deepening, threatening to undermine the DPS monolith in the medium term.

While some expect these tensions in DPS’ leadership to soon erupt to the surface, it is still too early to talk about divisions and splits from the party, although it is almost certain that some changes are to take place in the near future.

The opposition is still doing little in terms of organisational and strategic moves to improve its capacities. Public opinion trends suggest that DPS’ popularity continued to grow, while that of the opposition declined slightly, alongside a growing population of non-voters.

Parliamentary elections could take place in autumn 2012. An earlier date would interfere with the demanding six-month monitoring period of the European Commission in expectation of the final opening of accession talks with EU.