Posted on

The Economist on PPPs in Montenegro

Montenegro was ranked 19th among the 25 states on regional level (Balkan, Central European and Eastern European countries) in the 2012 report of the Economist which evaluates the environment for public private partnerships (PPP).

The criteria used for countries’ rankings were the degree of fulfillment of preconditions for realization of PPP projects. They implied assessment of legal and institutional frameworks, ability for the legal framework to be implemented, investment and finance climates, and ability to implement PPP projects at the local level.

Based on the evaluation of the aforementioned criteria it was noted that there is a significant room for improvements in Montenegro, particularly with regard to the enhancement of legal and institutional frameworks as well as the overall technical capacities for implementation of the PPP projects.

The report took advantage of the 2010 analysis of the Institute alternative Public Private Partnerships – Accountability, Transparency and Efficiency, in which we pinpointed numerous deficiencies precisely of legal and institutional solutions in the country, but also highlighted the lack of expertise for concluding and implementing the PPP projects.

Although the Economist states that in Montenegro there is a political will for enhancement of the legal and institutional preconditions for efficient implementation of the PPP and concessions, we think that precisely the lack of political will is the reason why there is no adequate legal framework. In Montenegro, there is neither an expert core for PPP and concessions. There is also a problem of unclear and intertwined competences and weak coordination between the institutions which conclude and manage the projects according to this model.

Posted on

Press release: Municipal spending in 2012 still a mystery

Only ten municipalities have so far adopted the final budget account (year-end report) for 2012. Although we are already well in the second half of 2013, we are still waiting for a complete information on how the municipality collected and spent funds in the previous year.

Therefore, we still do not know how municipalities spent and collected money in 2012, we do not know how the budget plan was executed. It is quite possible that we will not know for a long time: some municipalities (such as Budva, Plav, Kolašin) adopted their final 2011 budget account reports during 2013.

The reasons for this situation are numerous: breaching of deadlines by the local authorities, lack of interest by the local MPs for budgetary issues and the legal framework that does not encourage budget transparency.

According to the Law on Financing of Local Self-Government, local authorities are required to submit the final account of the budget by the end of May.

The legal framework does not prescribe the deadline for adopting the final account of the budget by the local parliament. The legal framework also does not provide for the obligation of local authorities to report on budget execution during the fiscal year, which means that neither local MPs members nor the public have information on budget execution throughout the year.

Also, it is almost completely useless to discuss the finances of the previous year at the end of this year. Such a late consideration of final accounts in most municipalities ridicules the purpose of its adoption by the local parliament, i.e. control of the budget by the local MPs.

The final budget account, as the final image of budget execution, is the most important instrument for the control of local budgets. It is a key budgetary document by which local MPs and citizens can gain insight into the financial flows of the municipality.

For fiscal transparency, timely disclosure of information is crucial. Local governments that have not yet done so (11 of them), must publish their final budget accounts for 2012 as soon as possible and thus finally reveal how the public money was spent in the previous year.

Marko SOŠIĆ
Policy Analyst

Check out the our new web portal for info on local budgets in Montenegro
www.MojGrad.me

Posted on

Press release: Condemnation of the assault on the journalist of Vijesti and Monitor

Institute Alternative strongly condemns attack on Tufik Softic, journalist of daily Vijesti and weekly Monitor. This case, as well as number of the so far unresolved assaults on journalists, proves that Montenegro is still not an environment in which the opinions can be publicly and openly stated and the issues relevant for the social reforms freely advocated.

Given the pressures which these assaults and threats create onto the all government critics, we urge the authorities to conduct urgent and efficient investigation of the attack on Softic, as well as to resolve and prosecute all the so far cases of assaults on media and journalists. Only by doing so, they will create preconditions for freedom of expression to be guaranteed. There is no democratization of society without the media freedom, neither without the open debate about the significant issues, such as fight against corruption and organized crime. The negotiations with the EU on the Chapters 23, dealing with judiciary and fundamental rights, should have a positive impact onto the media freedom in Montenegro if the resolution of numerous attacks on journalists is defined as one of the criteria for the progress in these talks. Condemnation of these attacks by all free-minded people can also have the same positive effect.