Posted on

Introductory IA activities at the regional anti-corruption project: SELDI network

Within the project ”Civil Society for Good Governance and Anti-Corruption in Southeastern Europe – Capacity building for monitoring, advocacy and awareness-raising” supported by the European Union, were organized meetings, conference and workshop in Belgrade, May 21-24th. The representatives of Institute alternative, Dina Bajramspahić and Marija Popović, attended the meeting of SELDI network’s Managing Board, SELDI policy networks opening conference and workshop, as well as at the conference of the European Commission, “EC and CSOs: Growing Together – A framework for partnership agreements”.

At the meeting of the SELDI network’s Managing Board on Tuesday, 21 May 2013th, representatives of 17 partner organizations discussed the SELDI Strategy and Action Plan. SELDI’s Strategy defines the mission and goals of the SELDI Coalition until the end of 2016th, and the specification of the network’s activities until the end of 2014. These strategic documents will be reviewed in the second half of 2014. They also discussed a number of questions about project menagment and reporting on the European Commission activities, also presented the plans for the establishment of the international Advisory Board of the Coalition.

Draft Strategy and Action Plan of the SELDI network can be found here.

On Wednesday, 22 May was held the Introductory conference and the SELDI network’s Policy Workshop “Main challenges of corruption and measures for fighting it” with a focus on four topics within 3 panels and a discussion:

  • Anti-corruption strategies and institutions in Serbia and South East Europe
  • Transparency of public finances: Corruption and anti-corruption in public procurement and public finances
  • Monitoring of the corruption and anti-corruption measures: role, capacity and integrity of the civil society,
  • Discussion: Perspectives on improving intergovernmental dialogue – civil society at regional and national level in the tackling corruption context.

Dina Bajramspahić, IA’s policy analyst, had a presentation in the second panel on “Corruption in public procurements in Montenegro.” She presented the key findings of IA research projects in the field of public procurement with particular reference to the risks of corruption.

During 23 and 24 May in Belgrade is also a conference by the European Commission and Civil Society: Growing up together – also preliminary conference about Framework partnership agreements under the program of support to civil society (CSF). The conference was organized by the European Commission (DG Enlargement), the Government of the Republic of Serbia, through its Office for Cooperation with NGOs and TACSO office in Serbia (Technical Assistance for Civil Society).

The two-day conference was attended by 200 representatives of civil society organizations that are partners in 18 projects supported by the European Union under the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA CSF) for civil society organizations of the Western Balkans and Turkey. At the conference were presented key elements of the Strategy and action plans of supported projects so that partners could have the opportunity for collaboration and networking with the aim of multiplying effects of activities within the project.

Topics that were discussed:

  • Capacity building and efforts to provide analysis, advocacy and monitoring of key sector reforms at the regional and national levels
  • Improving the environment for civil activism as well as public and civil society dialogue at the regional and national levels
  • Increase the legitimacy, transparency and accountability of CSOs in the region.

 

Posted on

Commentary on the draft Action plan for chapter 23

Institute Alternative prepared comments on the draft Action Plan for Chapter 23: Judiciary and Fundamental Rights. Comments, criticisms and suggestions, which we submitted to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration (coordinator of the process), are covering areas of the Action Plan that we deal with in our research efforts.

Download IA’s comments on the draft Action Plan for Chapter 23 (in Montenegrin only)

Posted on

Statement: Parliament’s role in drafting Action plans for chapters 23 and 24

Jovana Marović, IA’s research coordinator, commented on the participation of the Parliament in drafting the action plans for chapters 23 and 24 for the daily “Vijesti”:

The adoption of the Resolution on the role of the Parliament in the process of European integration is unreasonably delayed, as the Parliament was required to define its role in this process in the beginning of 2011. This document should resolve issues of importance to the active participation of Parliament in the process of negotiations, including the relationship with the executive.

Although representatives of the Parliamentary Service, as members of working groups, participated in the development of Action plans, the role of Parliament in fulfilling the conditions for opening negotiations on Chapters 23 and 24 should have been more active. Therefore, the draft versions of the action plans should be discussed in the Parliament prior to the adoption by the Government at the end of the month. Given that the Rules of Procedure provide that the Committee for European Integration is in charge of monitoring the negotiations, then they should be considered in this committee. However, a more functional model would be to include other committees in the discussion as well – such as the Anti-corruption Committee, the Committee for Economy, Finance and Budget.

A similar model should be used when considering the common positions – having joint sessions of the so called “parent” committees, those working bodies interested in the matter and the Committee for European Integration.

Oversight of the Government’s activities in the further course of the negotiations could be strengthened by introducing the commitment of quarterly reporting to the Committee on European Integration on the implementation of action plans and progress in the negotiations. This practice existed before, during considering the (monthly) reports on implementation of the Action Plan for monitoring the implementation of recommendations from the opinion of the European Commission.

The statement was published in today’s edition of “Vijesti” in an article titled “Boycott as an alibi”

Posted on

Press release of NGO Coalition: No political will for substantial changes in the Montenegrin society

Although the normative framework on human rights, fighting corruption and the development of civil society had been promoted, sufficiently strengthened and/or effective institutional mechanisms and inadequate implementation of the legislative framework in practice make the situation in these areas partially satisfactory. On the other hand, the situation in the area of judicial reform is still unsatisfactory. A common feature of the current situation in each of these areas is the lack of political will to get to the core of the positive change.

Below you can find the key findings of report made by Coalition of 15 NGOs for Monitoring the Accession Negotiations with the European Union under Chapter 23 – Judiciary and Fundamental Rights, consisted of detailed information on the level of the reforms undertaken in the areas of judicial reform, anti-corruption, human rights and development of civil society organizations from October 10 2012 to April 10 2013.

Constitutional reform is unduly delayed, although it is necessary to eliminate political interference in the appointment of judges and prosecutors. The proposed amendments of the Constitution have not been provided the necessary safeguards against political interference in the appointment of judicial officials, and it will be necessary to provide that by the law reform after the reform of the Constitution. Constitutional position of the State Prosecution is still uncertain – it has not been proposed who to appoint prosecutors-the State Prosecutor, and majority required for the appointment. Also, it has not been guaranteed that half of the Judicial Council members, besides judges, remain politically unengaged or associated in person, which enables a political impact in the future. Although there has been some progress, the work of the Judicial and Prosecutorial Council is still not transparent enough. There is no legal document that specifies the way of evaluating quality of judges’ work, and no system of regular evaluation of their work, which would provide certainty in decision making on career development, or calling for responsibility. Especially concerning are long lasting trials and abolition of verdicts, even twice in cases of special public importance such as war crimes in the nineties (the case Morinj) or organized crime (murder of police inspector Scekic from 2005).

Monitoring in the area of combating corruption in the period reveals the following problems: Agency for protection of personal data and the free access to information has not received adequate support from the Government of Montenegro for implementation of the Law on Free Access to Information, the State Audit Office is still working with its Senate incomplete; systematized the process of filling in the field of internal audit is slow ; absence of final decisions regarding corruption in public procurements; billing system of concessions is not adequate, the system of protection of “whistleblowers” is not satisfactory.

Some of the problems identified in the area of human rights during the period: growth in the number of reported incidents of discrimination and lack of final judgment in discrimination cases; ineffectively investigated and prosecuted cases of attacks on journalists; promotion of impunity of torture and other ill-treatment; unsatisfactory level of implementation of Gender Equality Law and ineffective implementation of the Strategy for Combating Domestic Violence (2011 – 2015); persons with disabilities continue to face limited access to facilities used by the public, health care, access to education at all levels and adequate vocational training and employment; lack of understanding of the need to protect the identity of LGBT people in court, lack of platforms at the national level for the protection of persons engaged in sex work, especially the plight of the Roma and Egyptian populations and internally displaced persons; the unavailability of legal aid to citizens that, due to financial situation, cannot get legal aid in all cases in which decisions are made about their rights and obligations- which are are just some of the problems identified in the area of human rights.

Government has shown willingness to cooperate with civil society at a formal level, however, there is still no fundamental understanding of the need for cooperation and investment in the non-governmental sector.

The Report contains concrete recommendations as necessary preconditions for the opening of negotiations under the Chapter 23. In addition, this document contains recommendations to the European Commission to improve access to reporting on the progress of Montenegro, to contribute to ensuring full transparency in the negotiating process and taking specific measures in judicial reform, fight against corruption and to protect human rights in accordance with its responsibilities.

The Report is signed by 15 member organizations of the Coalition:

  • Action for Human Rights
  • Anima-Center for Women and Peace Studies
  • Center for Anti-discrimination EQUISTA
  • Center for Democracy and Human Rights (CEDEM)
  • Centre for Monitoring (CEMI)
  • Centre for Development of NGOs ( CRNVO)
  • Center for Women’s Rights
  • European Movement in Montenegro
  • Institute alternative
  • Institute for Social Inclusion
  • Juventas
  • LGBT Forum Progress
  • Shelter
  • SOS line for Women and Children Victims of Violence-Niksic and
  • Association of Youth with Disabilities of Montenegro.

Report on the Situation in the area of judicial reform and human rights (Chapter 23) in Montenegro in the period from 10.10.2012. to 10.04.2013.

Posted on

Press release: SAI’s forgotten recommendations

The Government has not yet been submitted the first quarterly report on the implementation of the Action Plan for State Audit Institution’s (SAI) recommendations to the Parliament. This is a violation of the Parliament’s conclusion and confirms our claim that the effect of SAI’s work is hampered by the executive’s relation toward audit reports.

We call upon the Parliamentary Committee for Economy, Finance and Budget to urgently remind the Government about this responsibility and to hold the Ministry of Finance accountable for the delay. This is a prerequisite for conducting control hearing of the audit entities that do not fulfill SAI’s recommendations, as well as of the Minister of Finance for disregarding Committee’s conclusions.

In November last year, the Government has adopted an Action Plan to implement the SAI’s recommendations. IA criticized the action plan after its adoption, the superficial approach to its drafting and defective form in which it was adopted.

The Parliament, considering the year-end budget report and the SAI’s accompanying audit report, adopted conclusions which made an obligation for the Government to report on implementation of SAI’s recommendations at the end of each quarter. At the session of the Committee for Economy, Finance and Budget, the Minister of Finance announced a serious approach to the recommendations of the SAI and confirmed that the intention of the government to the implementation of their quarterly reports to the Parliament.

The promised quarterly report on the fulfillment of the Action Plan was not prepared: it was not discussed at the Government’s session, and IA found out through the request for free access to information that the Parliament does not have it either.

It should be remembered that this Action Plan was adopted because of serious irregularities that SAI reported in the year-end budget report audit, but also because of the embarrassingly low level of implementation of SAI’s last year’s recommendations (out of 18 recommendations imposed, 13 recommendations remained unfulfilled).

IA has long warned that the impact of SAI restricted by the government are not built mechanisms for horizontal application of SAI recommendations. Government’s latest disregard for the conclusions of the Parliament is a confirmation of our claims.

Marko SOŠIĆ
Policy Analyst

Posted on

Press release: The amounts of financial support must be elaborated

IA claims that the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare must elaborate the amount of financial support provided in the Bill Law on Social and Child Protection.

Statements of the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare during the parliamentary debate on the Bill Law on Social and Child Protection that Montenegro has the most generous financial support in the region and that there is no room to increase it, remain unfounded given the fact that the amount of social assistance and child benefits represent nearly one sixth of the minimum consumer basket. All financial contributions are set as a fixed amount. The adjustment of certain financial benefits to a larger amount remains a possibility depending on the prior opinion of the Ministry of Finance. This means that the adjustment of financial benefits is left to the decision of the Government.

Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare in the explanation attached to the text of Bill Law does not provide any analysis or information about the way thecertain amount of proposed financial support was determined. That raises additional doubts in proposed solutions. The basis and amount of financial benefits must be determined by a careful analysis of financial and other indicators, but the public is not informed about it. The public should know the reasons for determining the level of their financial benefits.The duty of the Ministry is to explain and make available all such analyzes. If not, all the claims of civil society representatives who support the growth of existing and introduction of new financial benefits remain eligible.

Also, it is not clear based on which assessments and analysis the Ministry stipulated that the implementation of the new Law will take less financial resources compared to the funds that had been allocated form the implementation of the Law on Social and Child Protection which is currently in force. Bear in mind that the new law envisages the establishment of the Institute for Social and Child Protection and the Social Innovation Fund within the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare, introduces the institute of social inspection and provides transformation of social and child protection facilities in order to encourage the development of social services. All these innovations request financial resources.

The explanation of the new provisions of the Bill Law which limit the right to reimbursement to employer for maternity or parental leave and the exercise of the right to material assistance for the nine months during the year, cannot be justified by budgetary reasons and establishing greater control, especially if the budget savings are achieved by limiting the exercise of the right of beneficiaries (in this case/ employers and beneficiaries of social assistance)who meet and comply the statutory obligations.

We believe that the biggest budget savings can be achieved by proper targeting of funds and prevention of abuse of rights. Significant contribution in that respect should be the establishment of a social welfare information system (social cards).

After introducing social cards and directing financial benefits to those who really need it, the Ministry will have no reason not to increase the amount of financial support to sociallyvulnerable categories and align it with actual cost of living in the country.

Dragana Radović
Policy Analyst