2013 – Page 24 – Institute Alternative

25. 01. 2013.24. 01. 2018.

Press release: No progress in regulating concessions

IA’s press releaseon
the Report on the implementation of obligations under concession agreements adopted by the Government on January 24 2013.

In the past year, no progress in the legal, institutional and control regulation of concessions in Montenegro has been made. Problems, identified in this area over the previous years, are still present. Specifically, a new legal framework for the area of concessions and public-private partnerships hasn’t been adopted yet although the working group for drafting the Bill of Law was formed in June 2011 and has held a series of consultations with experts from the EU and SIGMA in order to make the Bill. Therefore, after frequent announcements from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister that the area of concessions and public-private partnerships will be regulated by a single legal framework, it is still not clear what is a result of one and a half year old “work” on the legal framework and is there a political commitment to finally adopt this Law during the 2013, and thus to provide a transparent and efficient management of projects of this type.

Apart from the lack of an adequate legal framework, there is also a problem of unclear and “overlapping” jurisdiction and poor coordination among institutions which award and manage concessions. As a result of this confusing and imprecise institutional arrangements, there is no experts in this field in Montenegro. Concession Commission decides on a slight number (12) of complaints and has no other jurisdiction in this area, although significant annual budget (88,634.73 euros – Commission for Concessions; 35,590.47 euros – Commission for concessions and BOT) is allocated for her work.

Poor coordination between institutions at the national and local levels results in the absence of local plans of concessions. Some local administrations, as the audit report on the control of the State Audit Institution for the Municipality of Kotor demonstrates, don’t have any information “about the type of concessions on the basis of which the responsibility, maturity and payment of concessions at the state level as well as about the time that elapses from the time of collection to the consolidated account of the State Treasury to transfer to the account of the Treasury of the Municipality. ”

Inadequate system for collecting concession fees, and (inspection) monitoring of contracts implementation is also a specific restriction. Therefore, on behalf of concessionaires arrears in 2012 is over 12 million euros.

Lack of transparency is largely caused by incomplete central register of concessions, since the register on the Commission’s website for the concession does not include concession repayment plans or complete contracts on awarded concessions and data on contracts and obligations of the concessionaire in 2012 are completely missing.

The previous concession policy in Montenegro was unplanned, non-transparent, unsufficiently controlled, and as such requires urgent reform. In this respect, it’s necessary as soon as possible to adopt legally defined institutional framework in order to ensure adequate planning and effective monitoring system of collection and implementation of concession contracts.

Jovana MAROVIC
Research Coordinator

11. 01. 2013.04. 12. 2017.

Holiday’s games

Former head of the police said on 29 December last year: “In the future, I’ll take the opportunity to state my attitude on particular issues and relations of organized crime and corruption, politics, security services, media and infomal centers of power.”

What does Veljovic know, but he has not said yet? Was his intention to “speak” really and with the focus on public interest? Was his intention to defend or to attack, or just to protect his personal interest and interests of his close associates?

Will we know more soon? Will the media wait Veljovic or will they ask him something? Will the President of Montenegro, who has Veljovic as his advisor for defense and security, ask him and make a public statment? Will the Government ask Veljovic to communicate his point of view? In the end, will the Parliament’s Committee for Defense and Security require from Veljovic to say what he hasn’t said at the past numerious meetings?

Judging by the reaction during the holidays, no one will engage in particular to find out what Veljovic intended to say. In another country, the words of a former head of police would be an alarm, unlike in Montenegro where this is just another statement in the sea of others.

***

The State Prosecutor’s Office (SPO) arrested the head of criminal police in Budva. SPO said they have a strong suspicion that he exercised an influence against the law and that he asked the investigation of threats against journalist Lakic to take an unknown direction. Serious charge, if supported by the relevant evidence. What evidence can not be valid in this case? In the absence of witnesses, only the recording of the alleged conversation ( which is legally approved). Is there such a recording? From previous addresses to the Prosecutor, I conclude that there is. What will be the epilogue of this case? Probably none.

If this conversation (or any part thereof) really happened, whether the Prosecutor had a moral right to this kind of self-defense? Should she instead make an effort to gather evidence in line with the professional standards, including the secret surveillance measures? Whose are “vanity, personal animosity…” overpowered “sense and professionalism,” as it says Veljovic? Veljovic is probably right when he says that “the mountains trembled again, but the unresolved case is born.”

Just like last year, collateral damage in this case is Vladan Jokovic, a man whose resignation “for personal reasons”, and after the affair “listing”, additionaly empowered the misterious management of the security services. In secret and always by names (especially in the case of politicians and officials) opponent of the State Prosecutor, suddenly became talkative without proof. Why?

***

Media report that the Deputy of the Special Prosecutor for Corruption and Organized Crime (!!!) sought documents from the Commissiom for the allocation of part of revenue from games on chance for four non-governmental organizations. One of the four organizations reacted with the following information: “Unfortunately, we never received the funds from that Commission”. Another organization received “2900 euros” and in the letters”two thousand and nine hundred euros.”

What kind of corruption and organized crime is in question here? Does the Deputy play his own functions and powers? In whose interest is this all about? What message are we sending to the public, if information about her work transmits through the media to which he submits a false denunciation? What kind of message “special” sends to the public if it’s sent with a focus, on one hand, on “Corruption and Organized Crime”, and, on the other, on a number of NGOs? Has she already investigated all denunciations against officials and politicians submitted by citizens and NGOs during all these years? Is this a way of sending a message that it is possible to expect that name of anyone and any organization (or just chosen and corrupted ones) can be a part of the daily press? Would the media, hungry, tired of affairs of officials and politicians, run back into the arms of the obvious falsehood? Is the fact that some parts of the service aim to make pressure on the group of those who doesn’t fit their system of values and destroy citizens’ confidence in the NGOs unsignificant?

***

By the decision of the High Court another judicial case in marathon proceedings. In the case, former directors and officials of the Port of Bar took all the attention. Once the case was opened in the direct way by the SPO staff on the time-being board of directors. Today, four years later, it appears that it will remain a stain on the prosecution and on the police, since they claimed that they have a case, months of detention for a few people and demands for compensation from the budget.

These days, media published that “Special Prosecutor for Organized Crime and Corruption Djurdjina-Nina Ivanovic will submit all the evidence about severe abuse in the Department of Human Resources, Police Department, worth about one million euros, which was collected by former interior minister, Ivan Brajovic, and that she was intenisevely working on it.

Djurdjina Ivanovic, Special Prosecutor for organized crime and corruption: “We need to announce that the Special Public Prosecutor is in a possession of only one piece of information about the alleged abuses in the Police Directorate… No documentation for prosecution along with this information has been provided…”

Minister Brajovic, vice president of the SDP, neither confirmed nor denied either first or second information. Why?

Stevo Muk
President of the Managing Board

This article was originally published at web portal of daily newspapers “Vijesti”.

09. 01. 2013.25. 12. 2017.

Answers for daily newspapers “Dnevne novine”: Challenges In The Oversight of the Security Sector

Daily newspaper reporter’s questions:
– Challenges / problems in the security sector – Parliamentary Oversight – SAI

Issues that remain a challenge for the Montenegrin security sector are: development of oversight practices and democratic and civilian control of the security and defense sector institutions; and on the other hand, seeking the most appropriate model of relations and division of responsibilities between the two institutions that would result in the efficient fight against corruption and organized crime. The latter is a primary goal of this institution in the future and the further progress of Montenegro’s EU integration largely depends on it. Although the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), which regulates these relations, came into force only in September 2012, the initiatives for division of responsibilities between the police, prosecutors and investigating judges to be changed have already emerged under the guise of inefficiency.

When it comes to the oversight of security institutions, the most proactive is the Parliamentary Committee on Security and Defence. The Law on Parliamentary Oversight in the Field of Security and Defense, which regulates the work of this Committee, is a progressive legal solution which assigns to the Committee certain supervision mechanisms. However, the controls do not sufficiently apply and only the practice of oversight will develop their effectiveness that can be achieved by control of the state authorities. The Committee adopted conclusions which are still very general and do not offer sufficient guidance for the improvement of this sector. Institutions submit annual reports on their activities, but the structure of these statements is not defined in advance, although institutions have sufficient space to inform the Committee about the matters its evaluation is needed. This is particularly concerning when it comes to the NSA.

The first report of the SAI on the audit of NSA’s annual financial report in 2011 is extremely important and represents the first control by an independent institution responsible for the oversight of the NSA. Other institutions such as the Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms and the Agency for the Protection of Personal Data, didn’t carry out oversight of the NSA although they have the legal competence for carrying it out. Since the question of legality of the implementation of secret surveillance measures by the National Security Agency is often raised, and since it temporarily restricts constitutionally guaranteed rights of individuals, there is an urgent need for a detailed oversight of the way the NSA is collecting data.

The SAI’s finding which confirms that the NSA’s General Inspector, in charge of internal control in NSA, didn’t submit Reports on the controls of the Government or the director of the NSA, is especially alarming since it is a legal obligation. We believe that the Committee should hold an emergency hearing of the Government’s representatives which would explain why the General Inspector does not exercise the control.

The original article can be found here.