Posted on

Initiative for proactive publishing of the criminal charges

Institute Alternative submitted an initiative last week to the Supreme State Prosecutor, in order to initiate the good practice of publishing of all the confirmed charges, on the internet portal of the State Prosecution.

Therefore, it is of common concern and significance for the future judicary reform to enable access to all the informations about criminal cases, that are led against senior citizens in Montenegro. Publicity principle of criminal proceedings, therefore of the trial, must not be understood narrowly and should not be based on the media reporting and the possiblity for the interested parties to follow trials in the coart, but also the access to the prosecution acts should be enabled in the same manner as it is for the judicary ones.

In other words, according to the international standards of openness which are in relation to the judiciary authorities, it is neccessery to initiate announcements of the confirmed criminal charges, where the anonymization of the personal data would be conducted according to the Law on personal data protection.

Considering common doubts that the judiciary is faced with political influence, therefore unsufficient thrust of the citizens, the availbility of the charges would show determination and ability of the State prosecution to efficiently and justly conduct investigations and prosecute criminal offenders.

There is an extremly important neccesity for the announcement of the charges for the subjects that are of common significance for public, such as area of corruption, organized crime, war crime, terrorism, etc.

Considering that there haven’t been announcements for the charges so far, we propose taking an even attitude and anonymization of all the charges.

The stance of the European Court of Human Rights, in relation to the privacy protection of the parties and other participants in the process, consists of grading ratio of the publicity and availability in every specific subject, taking into consideration the special characteristics of the concrete case and the legitimate concern which limits the public access to the concrete act (by anonymization)[1]. Also, the European Court of Human Rights has in various occasions determined that criminal acts can be discussed before bringing the final verdict of someones’ guilt by the courts. Therefore, publishing the information about the accused without any presumption that the person is considered guilty will not cause the violation of the law on the presumption of the innocence.

We hope that the State Prosecutor will answer positively to our initiative and therefore contribute to the building of the public trust in work of the State Prosecution.

Dina Bajramspahić

Public policy researcher

[1] See: European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), B. and P. v The United Kingdom, 24. 4. 2001, par. 45-49.

[2] See, e.g. European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), Sunday Times v. The United Kingdom, 26. 4. 1979, par 65.

Posted on

Training: Monitoring and evaluation of policies under Chapter 23

Our researchers Dina Bajramspahić and Marko Sošić participated in the training for monitoring and evaluation of policies under Chapter 23, which was held in Bitola, Macedonia. On this occasion, they presented the experience of Montenegrin civil society in the process of accession negotiations at the special side event.

Training “Monitoring and Evaluation of Policies under Chapter 23″ was organized in the framework of the project “Network 23″, which is lead by the European Policy Institute (EPI) from Skopje. It was held from October 31 to November 2.

The aim of this project is to contribute to achieving greater participation of civil society in monitoring the state of affairs in the areas under Chapter 23 in Macedonia.

The project is financed by the EU and implemented in partnership with the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in the Republic of Macedonia and Center for Change Management.

Besides Institute Alternative, associates from the region are European Policy Centre from Belgrade and European Institute Foundation from Sofia.

IA representatives spoke at the special panel dedicated to analyzing the course of the negotiation process and opportunities for NGOs to participate. Dina presented the work of the Montenegrin Coalition for Monitoring Negotiations under Chapter 23, while Marko presented the participation of individuals – NGO representatives in the work of the working groups for monitoring negotiations.

Posted on

Conference on Energy Security in Sofia

Stevo Muk, president of the Managing Board of Institute Alternative, participated on international conference dedicated to energy security, organized by leading organization of SELDI network, Bulgarian Center for Study of Democracy.

On Monday, 27 October 2014, the Center for the Study of Democracy organized an international conference, dedicated to the energy security and state capture risks in Europe after the NATO Summit in Walls.

A particular focus of the event was placed on the corruption risk assessment in the energy sector and the possible policy options for improvement of the sector’s governance. The conference contributed to promoting the energy security dialogue in the alliance’s member and partner countries. The conference gathered leading EU and Black Sea Region policy-makers, government officials and civil society organizations.

On Tuesday, 28 October 2014, the SELDI initiative organized a seminar dedicated to CSO executive management and development, and SELDI Steering Committee Meeting. During the meeting, the effects of the current and upcoming activities were discussed.

Representatives from the Regional Cooperation Council (RCC) discussed the implementation of the SEE2020 Strategy and Regional Programming on Anti-corruption through Public-Private Partnerships.

The next activity of The SELDI Network will be a Regional Conference on Good Governance and Anti-corruption Policy Challenges in Tirana, Albania on 13-14 November 2014.

Related news:

Posted on

Constitution is clear: The Court must ban publishing of the disputed content

Court to rule an immediate ban on the distribution of all future media content which violates human rights and freedoms, in order to prevent further endangering of personal dignity and integrity by the daily newspaper “Informer”.

This was requested in an Initiative which was submitted today to the Basic State Prosecution Office in Podgorica and to the Supreme State Prosecution by seventeen representatives of the civil society. The Initiative relies on the fundamental constitutional principles of inviolability of dignity, safety, integrity and personal rights of all citizens.

Following the motion by the Prosecution, we expect that this time around the Basic Court in Podgorica will comply with the Media Law, interpreting it in the context of the Constitution of Montenegro, which stipulates that although everyone has the right to freedom of expression, this right is limited by the right to dignity, reputation and honor, and if it threatens public morals.

The Court ignored identical request of the signatories of the Initiative submitted in June this year.

Articles of the daily newspaper “Informer”, published on 27 and 28 October and referring to Ms Vanja Ćalović, represent a direct violation of constitutionally guaranteed human rights and freedoms. The Initiative seeks to ban the distribution of already published content, as well as all related print and audio-visual content that may appear in the future.

In this way, gross violations of human rights and freedoms would be prevented, while at the same time a timely response of institutions provided, in relation to irresponsibility and lack of professionalism of media and journalists.

The freedom of expression should not be an excuse for publication and distribution of the content published by the “Informer” in the past couple of days, nor of the content that appeared on the front pages of the same media a couple of months ago.

The damage incurred by the distribution of these issues cannot be eliminated “in hindsight” by the competent authorities. Therefore, the Prosecution needs to propose to the Court to rule an immediate ban on the distribution of all content immediately after their publication.

The signatories of the Initiative suggest that bringing certain provisions of the Media Law in connection with the Constitution of Montenegro provides the Prosecution with an opportunity to initiate such a motion before the competent court.

On this occasion, signatories of the Initiative urge for a more active role of other institutions that have a mandate to stand for the rights of all the citizens and which have, for now, been silent on the gross violations of human rights inflicted by the daily newspaper “Informer”.

In addition to the violation of dignity and integrity, the violations include severe form of sex-based discrimination. However, although the Ombudsman is obliged to alert the public to severe forms of discrimination, under the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination, Montenegrin Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms, Šućko Baković, has not yet publicly condemned the severe discrimination against women in the disputed articles.

The Initiative for submission of a proposal for acting of the Basic State Prosecution Office in accordance with provisions of Article 11 and Article 12 of the Media Law. (in Montenegrin)

The signatories of the Initiative are:

  • Ana Novaković, Executive Director of Centre for Development of NGOs (CRNVO),
  • Biljana Zeković, Executive Director of the SOS Hotline for women and children victims of violence Podgorica,
  • Daliborka Uljarević, Executive Director of Centre for Civic Education (CCE),
  • Goran Đurović, President of the Managing Board of the Coalition of NGOs “Through Cooperation to the Aim”,
  • Hatidža Neljaj, Executive Director of the SOS Hotline for women and children victims of violence Ulcinj,
  • Ljupka Kovačević, Coordinator of Center for women`s and peace education ANIMA,
  • Ljiljana Raičević, Executive Director of Women’s Safe House,
  • Marijana Laković Drašković, Human Rights Expert,
  • Maja Raičević, Executive Director of Center for Women’s Rights,
  • Marina Vujačić, Executive Director of the Association of Youth with Disabilities of Montenegro,
  • Milan Šaranović, Managing Director of the Centre for Antidiscrimination EKVISTA,
  • Milenko Vojičić, Executive Director of the Association “Plegija” Nikšić,
  • Milka Tadić Mijović, Executive Director of the weekly “Monitor”,
  • Nataša Međedović, Executive Director of the SOS Hotline for women and children victims of violence Nikšić,
  • Slavica Striković, Executive Director of the Women’s Action,
  • Stevo Muk, President of the Managing Board of Institute Alternative,
  • Žarko Rakčević, Coordinator of the Forum 2010.
Posted on

Panel discussion: Civil Society and Negotiations under Chapters 23 and 24

Polish Institute of International Affairs, Visegrad Fund and their partners in Montenegro: Institute Alternative (IA), Center for Monitoring and Research (CeMI) and Center for Democracy and Human Rights (CEDEM), will organize a panel discussion “Civil Society and Negotiations under Chapters 23 and 24” on Thursday, November 6, starting at 11 a.m. The panel discussion will be held at the premises of PR Center.

The panelists are:

  • Tomasz Żornaczuk, Coordinator of the project “Thinking for Governance” and analyst at the Polish Institute of International Affairs
  • Jovana Marović, Research Coordinator at Institute Alternative – Fight against corruption
  • Vlado Dedović, Director of the Legal department at Center for Monitoring and Research – Judicial reform
  • Marija Vuksanović, Project manager at Centre for Democracy and Human Rights – Asylum and Migration

The motive behind organizing this panel discussion is to present the analysis “Civil Society in the EU Integration of the Western Balkans”, which focuses on the involvement of civil society organizations in negotiations under Chapters 23 and 24. The study is co-authored by 20 experts from the Western Balkans’ CSOs which are directly involved in the negotiation process.

The analysis “Civil Society in the EU Integration of the Western Balkans” is available here.

The project is financed by the International Visegrad Fund.

Posted on

Press release: European Commission’s comments on the anti-corruption legislation must be public

Since the public is not allowed to gain insight into the comments of the European Commission on the drafts to the key pieces of legislation related to fight against corruption and judiciary reform, it is unclear to what extent the draft laws correspond to the suggestions made by the European Union.

Amendments to the Law on Public Procurement are currently in parliamentary procedure and will be adopted with one-year delay in relation to the deadline foreseen in the Action Plan for Chapter 23 and the Government’s 2013 Work Programme. In spite of the fact that during the public hearing organized in March 2014 the interested public could submit comments and suggestions for improvement of this legal text, the comments of the European Commission on the draft law are still unavailable.

In this regard, in July 2014, Institute Alternative submitted the request for access to information to the Public Procurement Administration seeking access to comments of the European Commission. The Public Procurement Administration informed us that they were not in possession of the requested information and that our request will be forwarded to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration. The Ministry has not responded to our request to this day. The question arises as to how is it possible that the competent authority for implementation of the Law on Public Procurement is not in possession of this document, and, thus, which suggestions were their guide in the process of amendment and “improvement” of the legal text. Bearing in mind that the text of the draft law does not improve existing anti-corruption mechanisms, does not introduce new ones and does not establish an appropriate model for monitoring the implementation of procurement contracts, which is one of the benchmarks for progress in the negotiations under Chapter 23, it is questionable to what extent these solutions correspond to the suggestions of the European Commission. Additionally, persistent transferring of jurisdiction from one address to another is problematic from the aspect of process coordination, but also when it comes to openness of institutions.

Given that several crucial laws regulating the area of fight against corruption and judiciary reform will be put in parliamentary procedure in the forthcoming period, we urge the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration to provide an insight into the European Commission’s comments on these laws to the interested public.

Jovana Marović
Research Coordinator