Posted on

Press release: Government Eluding Obligations from the Action Plan for Chapter 23

The Government is behind the schedule with implementation of the majority of measures from the Action Plan for Chapter 23 – Judiciary and Fundamental Rights related to public procurement.

The third reporting period on the implementation of measures from the Action Plan for Chapter 23 does not represent an exception when it comes to failing to adopt the amendments to the Law on Public Procurement, since the Bill was adopted by the Government on July 17. The deadline for fulfillment of this obligation was set for December 2013. The Draft Law on Amendments to the Law on Public Procurement does not contain any core recommendations from the Action Plan for Chapter 23, like the one related to introducing adjustments to the manner of appointment of the president and the members of the State Commission for the Control of Public Procurement Procedures, nor the one entailing introduction of negative references for the bidders who have previously violated their contractual obligations.

There was no advancement in developing risk analysis methodology in performing control activities, which is aimed at enabling proactive action in prevention and early detection of corruption. The Working Group tasked with establishing the aforementioned methodology was formed on March 14, 2014, and so far held only one meeting.

The deadline for increasing the number of authorized officers from one to three, as well as increasing the number of inspection controls, was set for January 2014. However, in the Inspection for Public Procurements of the Administration for Inspection Affairs there is still only one inspector conducting supervision in this area. During 2013, public procurement inspectors have conducted only 84 inspection controls.

Jovana MAROVIĆ

Research Coordinator

Posted on

Press release: Forgotten Conclusion of the Parliament

The Government has not complied with the Conclusion of the Parliament and has not yet submitted the mid-year budget execution report. This is a blatant violation of the Parliament’s Conclusion which was unanimously adopted accompanying the 2014 Budget Law, upon the proposal of the Socialist People’s Party (SNP).

According to the adopted Conclusion, the report was expected to show whether the growth in revenue collection was achieved in so far as envisaged by the Plan of the Budget Law. If determined that it was, the Conclusion of the Parliament obliged the Government to propose measures for reallocating these funds with the aim of increasing expenditure for social welfare and protection of vulnerable classes of society.

The Government failed to fulfill this obligation and to this day has not submitted the requested report to the Parliament. The deadline for submission determined by the Parliament was June 30, 2014.

This way, MPs’ attempt to ensure being more adequately informed about the budget execution, and indirectly, exert greater degree of parliamentary control over the budget, was hindered.

Let us remind that Montenegrin Ministry of Finance is the only one in the region that does not submit semi-annual reports to the Parliament on the execution of the budget. The Bill on Budget and Fiscal Responsibility does not stipulate the obligation of the Ministry of Finance to prepare and submit to the Parliament a report on the budget execution during the course of the fiscal year for which the budget was adopted. From the moment the next year’s budget is adopted in December of the current year, the Parliament and the relevant Committee have no information about its execution until September of the following year, when the final account of the budget is submitted for review.

While participating in drafting the Law on Budget and Fiscal Responsibility, Institute Alternative has proposed to precisely define the obligation of semi-annual reporting to the Parliament on the budget execution. We have also proposed to introduce an obligation to the Ministry of Finance to submit a report on the current state of budget execution at the request of the Parliament, which can be made at any time.

None of these suggestions were accepted and today we find ourselves in the situation where the Parliamentary conclusions are neglected by the Government and the Ministry of Finance.

Institute Alternative, with the support of the Open Society Foundations – Think Tank Fund, implements the project “Analytical Monitoring of the Oversight Function of the Parliament” which aims to strengthen the impact of implementation of the parliamentary control mechanisms.

Marko Sošić
Public Policy Researcher

Posted on

For State Administration – Equal for All

After pinpointing the main challenges of introduction of the merit-based system in Montenegrin state administration, Institute Alternative will continue to monitor the implementation of the Law on Civil Servants and State Employees.

With the financial support of the U. S. Embassy in Podgorica, IA will implement the project “State Administration in Montenegro – Equal for All” over the next twelve months.

Within the project, we will continue to monitor filling of vacancies in state authorities. We will also launch an online interactive platform, with an aim of encouraging citizens to report problems and eventual infringements of their rights from the side of Montenegrin administration. Guide for job candidates in state authorities will also be designed.

With the start of the implementation of the new Law on Civil Servants and State Employees in January 2013, IA has recognised the significance of the consistent implementation of this act, which is expected to introduce expert qualifications and performance of candidates as the key crteria of their recruitment and promotion.

In the annual monitoring report, we have highlighted key problems which impede establishment of the merit-based system in Montenegrin state administration.

State authorities were not prepared for the implementation of the new act. Until January 1, 2014, data for only third of employees who fall under the scope of the Law were entered into the Central Human Resources Register.

Legal status of fixed-term employees in state authorities was also not properly resolved before the start of the application of the act. Their job security was thus severely endangered. Only in the Ministry of Interior, there were over 500 fixed-term employees in 2013, although the Law prescribes this kind of employment just in exceptional circumstances. More than third of these employees will lose their jobs, because they fail to meet eligibility criteria for positions they currently occupy.

At least two state administration authorities, Education Bureau and Agency for Environmental Protection, concluded employee transfer agreements with the agency for employment mediation. They have thus circumvented obligatory testing procedures and breached the Law.

Five people appealed against recruitment procedures in state administration authorities over the previous year. The three appeals were upheld. Decisions on upholding these appeals suggest the inconsistencies in ensuring funds for filling of vacancies and disrespect of eligibility criteria for a job position.

These findings suggest the need for continuous monitoring of the application of the new rules. More engagement from the side of the state authorities, especially of the Human Resources Management Authority, Administrative Inspection and of the State Audit Institution, is also required in order for the circumvention of the Law to be prevented.

Milena Milošević
Policy Analyst

Posted on

The European Parliament Elections – Towards Winning Mandates for Achieving Greater Impact?

Research Coordinator Jovana Marović, participated in the symposium “Elections for the European Parliament – Through Mandates for a Greater Impact?“, which was held on 15 July 204, at the Faculty of Political Sciences in Belgrade.

The conference aimed at offering an analysis of the institutional and political outcomes of the European Parliament elections held in May 2014 from the perspectives of different academic disciplines. Therefore, it was divided into three panels within which the following topics were discussed: the election results and the new party structures within the European Parliament; changes in the inter-institutional structure of the EU following the elections; as well as the possible contribution of the election process towards exiting the structural and economic crisis the EU has been faced with for a long time.

The academic conference was organized within the project “Jean Monnet Module – Constitutional Politics of the European Union”. As a result, proceedings of the participants of the conference will be published.

Posted on

Policy Evaluation and Performance Audit

Together with the partners from the TEN Network – Centre for European Policy (CEP) from Belgrade and European Policy Institute (EPI) from Skopje, Institute Alternative will conduct a research about the connection between the policy evaluation and the performance audit in the coming year.

The project “Policy Evaluation and Performance Audit – On the Same or Parallel Tracks?” was supported by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) within the framework of the Regional Research Promotion Programme in the Western Balkans (RRPP). The RRPP is coordinated and operated by the Interfaculty Institute for Central and Eastern Europe (IICEE) at the University of Fribourg.

The RRPP aims to strengthen research capacities in the field of social sciences in Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia, by fostering specific reforms in these countries based on identifying the long-term implications of potential policy choices.

The project “Policy Evaluation and Performance Audit – On the Same or Parallel Track?” is focused on the analysis of these two mechanisms in Montenegro, Serbia and Macedonia, as well as on the research of comparative practices in the six European Union member states. The findings of our research will be presented at the regional conference marking the completion of the project, which will be held in Belgrade, as well as at the International Conference on Public Policies, which will be held in Milan, in July 2015.

Each partner organization participated at the introductory seminar for supported projects held at the RRPP Local Coordination Unit in Serbia – Institute of Economic Sciences in Belgrade, on July 10, 2014. Research Coordinator Jovana Marović participated at the seminar in front of Institute Alternative.

Posted on

Press release: What about the Law on Special Prosecutor’s Office?

The semi-annual report on the implementation of the Action Plan for Chapter 23 “Judiciary and Fundamental Rights”, which was published by the Government of Montenegro on 10 July 2014, does not contain any proper information on the status of the Draft Law on Special Prosecutor’s Office.

Representatives of Institute Alternative participated in ten meetings of the Working Group, which were held in January and February 2014 (on 27, 28, 29, 30, and 31 January, as well as on 6, 10, 13, 21, and 27 February), and submitted comments and suggestions on several drafts of the Law.

As previously stated, representative of Institute Alternative participated in the last Working Group meeting, held on 27 February. Following this meeting, on 28 February the then-current version was supposed to be agreed upon at the ministerial level, i.e. between Minister of Justice, Minister of Interior, and Acting Chief State Prosecutor.

Since then, four months and eleven days have passed. Despite our numerous attempts to get in touch with the officials in charge at the Ministry of Justice and find out about the continuation of work of the Working Group, we have not yet received an appropriate response.

According to the Plan for the implementation of conclusions from the Analysis of the organizational structure, capacities and authorities of the state bodies and administration bodies in combating organized crime and corruption, the public debate on the draft of this Law was envisaged for May or June 2014.

The public has the right to know which issues delayed publication of the Draft Law and prevented interested parties from participating constructively in improving this important legislation. The reform of the Special Prosecutor’s Office, which shall have jurisdiction to proceed in the cases of high corruption and organised crime, is one of the most important issues for further advancement in the negotiation process on Chapter 23.

Since the adoption of the Law in the Parliament is scheduled for October, we expresses concern that the opportunity to allow the public to contribute to building an effective institutional framework for fight against corruption and organized crime in Montenegro is being hindered.

This is corroborated by the practice of organizing public debates on several important pieces of legislation during the course of a single day, just as yesterday’s debate organised by the Ministry of Justice proved to be merely a formality.

Stevo MUK

President of the Managing Board

Related posts: