Conference: Towards a Better Public Administration in Montenegro
No Progress in Public Administration without Accountability for Failure to Act
There will be no substantial progress towards better public administration in Montenegro until there is accountability for violations of laws, failure to act and administrative silence, as assessed by the Institute Alternative (IA).
At the conference “Better Public Administration in Montenegro”, organized by the IA, Milena Milošević, Public Policy Researcher in the organisation, pointed out that accessibility of public services is a problem that everyone should be worried about and which needs to be tackled.
“In April this year, when 24 institutions were visited, two-thirds of them had no access ramp for disabled persons at the entrance. And even in the one third that provided some access for these persons, there was no accessibility inside the institutions. I find this to be one of the most neglected issues of public administration reform, ” Milošević said.
She further noted that key issues and challenges are present in the area of access to information.
“Institute Alternative was denied access to information about public debt management, as well as information on fulfilment of tax obligations of 16 local self-governments in Montenegro. Our stance is that tax secret and business secret should not apply to public institutions’ affairs, “Milošević said.
According to her, there will be no substantial progress until there is accountability for “drastic” violations of laws, failure to act and administrative silence.
“In this regard, there are concerns about the weak capacities of the Administrative Inspectorate. We noted that there are still just over half of fulfilled positions of administrative inspectors. This important department, within the Ministry of Public Administration, still has no chief administrative inspector, and during the last year it did not have an inspection supervision plan either, “Milošević said.
Public opinion survey showed that about 50 percent of Montenegrin citizens have high or moderate trust in public administration.
“It is not growing. There is definitely no positive impact of the application of new solutions on citizens’ trust in public administration. Some partial progress has been achieved with the new Law on Civil Servants and State Employees and the new Law on Local Self-Government, “Milošević said.
She pointed out that implementation of optimization process is still pending which, as she explained, means adjusting the number of public administration employees to its actual needs.
“Also, we are still waiting for the technological preconditions for efficient exchange of information between state bodies and local self-government bodies to be met. We are still waiting for improvement of citizens’ participation in decision-making, through amendments to bylaws. We are still waiting for reduction in what bothers citizens the most, i.e, reduction of employment through friends, family or political connections, “Milošević said.
She considers that the Government of Montenegro often does not implement the laws it proposes, as well as the conclusions it adopts.
Marija Hajduković, the Head of the Department for Management of PAR Process in the Ministry of Public Administration, assessed that some performance indicators showed a negative trend and that this was the case with free access to information.
Hajduković believes that shift in consciousness is very important and that, in the coming period, the bureaucratic system needs to reach the key goal “which is to be a service-oriented public administration”.
“We believe it is a very important task and activity to increase citizens’ trust in public administration, through simplification of administrative procedures, better service delivery, establishment of one stop shops where citizens could at one place realize services they expect from the public administration,” clarified Hajduković.
She pointed out that many activities were carried out in the previous year and that conditions have been created for having institutional and political coordination of the reform process.
“Independent monitoring is a powerful tool in the hands of civil sector because it provides citizens with a broader image of the results achieved in the reform, limitations and non-implemented plans, and in this way it gives the citizens an insight into the results achieved by the Ministry of Public Administration and other institutions that are responsible for the process of this reform, “Hajduković said.
She believes that administrative silence is a more negative occurrence than rejection of requests.
“Because the request is rejected based on certain legal grounds, where one can, through legal protection, assess the legality of rejecting such a request,” said Hajduković.
UNDP Program Manager, Jelena Mrdak, said that when it comes to local self-government, most has been done in the context of legislative framework, noting that the Law on Local Self-Government and the Law on Civil Servants and State Employees were adopted.
“The new Law on Financing Local Self-Governments is being drafted. The Strategy foresees an indicator of reducing the number of employees by five percent at the local level by the end of this year, and by ten percent by 2020. This is a very significant challenge, given that 54 percent of local-level employees work in public companies. This figure, which is about 1.217 employees, will be very difficult to reach, “Mrdak explained.
According to her, a very important activity is introduction of single information system for administration of local public revenues.
“This is an important activity from several aspects, but above all because of better collection of real estate tax. So, through this information system, we will enable local governments to improve their tax collection, “Mrdak said.
She considers it important to strengthen the internal audit system at the local level.
“It exists in practice, but it needs to be more prominent. Indeed, it needs to be approached more seriously, “Mrdak said.
Program Manager at the Regional School of Public Administration (ReSPA), Dragan Đurić, assessed that relation to the concept of public administration reform is radically different today from what it used to be.
“I remember systems in which state administration was not the service of citizens, but citizens were the service of state administration. We are still up to our knees in the mud of tradition, which impedes us. One of the key problems is that we still do not see in the public administration system the administration’s purpose to solve a problem, “Đurić said.
Providing quality public services is, as he said, one of the central tasks of public administration.
“Good administrations are cohesive, they provide overall cohesion in society. When we look at Montenegro, we see that we are not a very cohesive society. This is an additional task for the administration to make sure that all citizens feel equal and that everything is available to them in a similar way, “Đurić said.
He stressed that public administration should respond to new needs, recognize them and respond to them.
Representative of the Association of Youth with Disabilities of Montenegro (AYDM), Miroslav Mima Ivanović, assessed that the public administration in Montenegro is “far from citizens’ service, citizens with disabilities”.
“Citizens with disabilities are not even their service, but the impression is that persons with disabilities are a collateral damage and need to be closed in some institutions, within four walls of their home or, if they need to establish contact with public administration, they should not do it personally, someone should do it for them instead, “Ivanović said.
She thinks that the protection of the rights and interests of persons with disabilities before the public administration does not only imply provision of physical access to the facilities of public institutions but, also the manner of establishing communication and delivering information in an accessible format.
Deputy Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms, Petar Ivezić, said that there is still a problem of failing to act on citizens’ requests or disrespecting legal deadlines for decision-making, that is, administrative silence.
“It often happens that there is a ping-pong decision-making system in the work of state administration or local self-government, which is not allowed. In this way, reputation and acting of state administration bodies and the exercise of citizens’ rights are affected, “said Ivezić.
President of Defence and Army Union of Montenegro, Nenad Čobeljić, pointed out that mistakes of civil servants and employees should be graded.
“These mistakes can stem from neglect, but also ultimate ignorance and intent. Civil servants, who make intentional mistakes, must be held accountable. Special measures must be taken against them, in a sense of moving them to other positions, where their irresponsible work will impose less damage to the Ministry and other bodies, as well as to the citizens, “said Čobeljić.
Member of the Council of the Agency for Protection of Personal Data and Free Access to Information, Radenko Lacmanović, believes that amendments to the Law on Free Access to Information are necessary and should be made in the interest of citizens themselves and the exercise of the public’s right to know.
Below you can find video clips from the conference.
The conference is a final event of the project “Civil Society for Good Governance: To Act and Account!”, Implemented by the Institute Alternative, Bonum, Nature, New horizon and Center for Research Journalism, and funded by the European Union within the Civil Society Facility , and the Balkan Trust for Democracy, a project of the German Marshall Fund of the US (GMF). The contents of the blog are the sole responsibility of the author and can not be taken to reflect the views of the donors.
Blog: Freedom to the People!
It looks like the Government will “forgive us for beating us”. Prime Minister Marković told journalist during the meeting with the European Union High Representative, Federica Mogherini, that we have “quality and potential”, but we use it in a wrong way.
On the one hand, I was relieved, because if they think we are using it in a wrong way, it means we are on the right track.
What we, the four NGOs (CCE, CEMI, CDNGO and Institute Alternative) really called for, was probably blurred by a fearsome campaign run via pro-government media, from the stands of presidential candidate Đukanović and NGOs close to him.
Our document titled “Montenegro – Between Reform Leader and Reform Simulacrum”, which we sent to the European Union a whole month before the elections, gave them a lot of worries. Only the truth can hurt so much. And the only truth is that we called on the EU to open its eyes wide and use the announcement of stricter conditionality in chapters concerning the rule of law, which it devised itself, so that real reforms would begin. In order for politicians to realise that they cannot not work and lie without sanctions.
Fortunately for us, during this month, there was no one who would refute a single letter from the document containing all eleven pages. Those who like to read and do not want others to interpret reality for them can read this document in its entirety on the websites of our organizations.
How did this document come into existence? It was drafted as a consequence of our conviction that only a serious warning or a decisive message from the European Union that it would “seriously consider activating the balance clause” can wake up our government and prevent the continuation of game in which “Montenegrin Government masterfully applies the exhaustion strategy to the process of European integration, abusing the EU’s need for a new integration optimism”. So we literally wrote in the document.
Who has basically written the document of the four NGOs? All those ministers, managers, assistants, secretaries, prosecutors, police officers, and judges who had in the last, this and all earlier years feverishly tried to turn inactivity into praise, empty talk into success story, poor indicators into bright statistics.
What is the fundamental difference between us and them? They want Montenegro to enter the European Union with nothing changed in the area of rule of law, fight against corruption and good governance!
We want Montenegro to use the negotiation process to change for the better! Simply, we want Montenegro to enter the European Union in a better state than Romania or Bulgaria were at the time of their accession, so there is not another Orban’s Hungary in the EU.
What is the content of the intimidation campaign that was and still is run?
Four non-governmental organisations have been proclaimed “political”, and deemed equal to “those who were chasing away foreign investors”, they are “reform inhibitors”, “domestic” (traitors was not pronounced but was implied). Editors and columnists of pro-government press have competed in vilifying us, so one even claimed that we would “call for bombing of Montenegro” and another one noted that “unfortunately in Montenegro there is…” one of us from NGO. I guess the lucky circumstance would be if we did not exist.
They also determined that our motives are “personal” and “lucrative” and that we do all this contrary to the citizens’ interests.
One high-ranking state employee stated that the requests of four NGOs’ would negatively affect students at universities, salaries and pensions, possibility of traveling to the EU without a visa, i.e. that our document almost caused thousands of tearstained and impoverished persons across our country. False. Also, pathetic.
Neither did Gordana Đurović’s explanation help, who condemned the document without even reading it. She previously stated that the balance clause is a “lighter form of suspension of negotiations that would manifest itself in the” blockade” of opening new negotiating chapters if there is no further and sufficient progress in chapters 23 and 24, which focus on comprehensive fight against corruption and strengthening efficiency and independence of the judiciary”.
That our initiative is political, and that it is in the function of the opposition and the elections, was best demonstrated by the opposition presidential candidate, Mladen Bojanić, who stated that halting negotiations would be in favour of Đukanović and DPS.
Either we from the four NGOs are some kind of double agents working both for the ruling party and the opposition or the matter is complicated and seedy all the way.
On the other hand, I am still “extremely worried” about the ability of the EU to understand how empty amiable diplomatic sentences which glorify the superhuman efforts of our authorities sound.
Although the report contains (mostly) all that the NGOs have been pointing out and that independent media have been writing about, political messages stated in relation to the report are still an unfortunate result of a hidden expectation as well as an old need to give one of the runners in the long European race a role of the one running first stages above its real abilities, so that it gives a faster pace to the whole race. It is to be expected that this race, after Albania and Macedonia start running, will provide healthier competition and a more objective comparative image.
There is no dilemma that the language of politicians and diplomats cannot be the same as the language of civil society. Our language is direct and open. Nevertheless, the political messages given in relation to the report blur the somber image of Montenegrin reforms contained in the Commission’s report.
Still, it must be that our willingness to openly question the EU’s approach and to point out shortcomings in measuring the government’s performance showcases our integrity, given that our work is dominantly supported by the European Union.
But let’s go back to the campaign against freedom of expression, which essentially lasts since government and its critics came into being, and which increases with sharper criticism, and is aimed against the key critics (NGOs, media, democratic opposition and other free individuals).
Umberto Eco referred to one of ten elements of fascism as “disagreement is treason” and explained that fascists cannot withstand criticism. It was therefore paradoxical to hear the regime leader calling fascists the media and NGOs who dared to criticise the affairs of his heir to the state.
Seems to be a matter of a serious mix up.
We must never forget that freedom of expression is an essential part of human rights and a precondition for democracy and civil society.
In the end, all these threatening messages to critics of wrong, undemocratic and corrupt policies and practices are in fact addressed to all citizens so that nothing similar occurs to them.
This is why we must continue to defend freedom of expression in every place! Without freedom of expression there is no freedom, people!
Stevo Muk
President of the Managing Board
Blog was originally published on the Vijesti portal
Instead of Reforms, Status Quo: Control of Assets Declarations and Conflict of Interest in Montenegro
Conference: Towards Qualitative Signs of the Anti-corruption Efficacy
The conference “Towards Qualitative Signs of the Anti-corruption Efficacy” was organised within the project under the same title, financially supported by the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands”.
Bicycle Traffic and Public Administration: A curving path to an unknown destination
This spring, the massive use of bicycles as a vehicle on the streets of Podgorica seems like an achievable goal. In addition to all warnings – that the citizens of the Capital are too lazy, that the car for them is indispensable status symbol, that the traffic conditions are not favorable for cycling – the situation on the cycling routes indicates the increasing number of citizens from Podgorica who decided to use cycling, the most efficient way to go through the city in which the distance between distant urban districts is not more than 10km. To what extent does the public administration support this process, and how can this support be more meaningful?
In order for citizens to start looking on bicycles as an acceptable and affordable for city transportation, it is necessary to provide infrastructure, ensure compliance with traffic rules, work hard on the education of all participants in the traffic, and constantly finding new ways to encourage new users of bicycles. So far, these processes in Podgorica only begun. Now we have a cycling infrastructure that was planned quickly without the systematic public participation. As a result, there are numerous uneven and unsafe sections on trails, narrow sidewalks, confusing areas in which signaling merges with bus and taxi sings, set directions of movement that increase the number of potential conflict points with other road users, and bicycle trails that serve as a illegal parking for cars. The inability of the competent services to free new cycling space of the obstacles in the form of stopped and parked vehicles indicates that the systemic problems – poor legislation, insufficient capacity, unclear procedures, inconsistent penal policy – make it difficult to establish and respect the rules that should apply to all traffic participants. The results are unsafe streets, but also the reduced effectiveness of educational campaigns: how should we learn about different and better ways to move around the city, if system support in the form of implementation of existing rules is missing? Each step in this process is, therefore, conditioned by the previous one, and so the improvements have to be systemic and comprehensive, in order to be effective and long-term.
Let’s take an example of building bicycle infrastructure in Podgorica. It would be wrong to say that the effort which has, over the past years, bounded the space for bicycle users on the streets of Podgorica, did not produce a result: the separate paths, with all the flaws in the planning and realization of the works, made the movement safer. In addition, the marked area meant a welcome for bicycles, which should be introduced into traffic flows as a legitimate and equal vehicle. The minimum expected result – more cyclists on the road – is obviously accomplished. However, we do not know exactly how big this increase is. We also do not know which obstacles in traffic are seen by potential cyclists and cyclists who yet do not dare to give a chance to a new vehicle; we do not know which part of these new rides on bicycle serve for entertainment and recreation, and which actually replaces the car on the way to work or school; finally, we do not know which percentage of citizens of Podgorica regularly use the bicycle as a vehicle. Without this data, we tap in the dark, not being able to plan improvements of the existing measures if we do not know the effect of those already implemented.
In the official statistics, however, there is still no detailed report that would allow insight into this topic, nor it is known when and whether such report would be made. Therefore, it cannot be a surprise if the activities of public administration, designed with the aim of promoting cycling and improving the traffic situation, are unspecified and unconnected. This is an expected consequence of planning without thorough problem definition, without regular contact with users and without a well-defined outcome. And that leaves us all in an unproductive and infinite loop known as ”well, some things are being done”, in which we can never be sure whether what we do is useful or not, and if it is, for whom is useful and to what extent.
It is not so difficult to set clear goals and timeframes to be achieved. According to the data of the European Cycling Federation, in 2012 in Germany, 10% of passengers used bicycles every day for transport; the National Bicycle Development Plan predicts that it should reach 15% by 2020. In the Czech Republic, they plan to significantly improve the situation from 2013 when the share of cyclists in urban traffic was only 7% so that by 2020 this share will be 10%, and by 2025 it will increase to as much as 25%. Almost all European countries and larger cities have a strategic document that contains guidelines for the development of cycling traffic, and incentive measures need to be harmonized with them. We are still waiting for such document. In the meantime, the city invests significant funds in expanding important roads, such as the boulevard of Donja Gorica, where, even after the reconstruction, there will be no separate trails for cyclists. If the goal is dynamic, safe and accessible bicycle transport which links the entire urban area, this is a step backwards, since failures in the construction of the large infrastructure projects are difficult to correct and have a major impact on the future development of city traffic.
When we spoke at a public debate on sustainable mobility two years ago, the representative of the city administration concluded her presentation with the remark that sustainable mobility is necessary for a ”city of a pleasant living”, and the question: ”can Podgorica be such city?”. Answer depends solely on the courage of public administration, the comprehensive approach, and the development policy that will – or will not – create conditions, space and incentives for change. Podgorica can be whatever we want. We need to agree on what we really want, and start to work and dedicate ourselves to that.
Sonja Dragović, MSc in Urbanism and member of Biciklo.me
The blog was produced within the project “Civil Society for Good Governance: To Act and Account!”, Implemented by the Institute Alternative, Bonum, Nature, New horizon and Center for Research Journalism, and funded by the European Union within the Civil Society Facility , and the Balkan Trust for Democracy, a project of the German Marshall Fund of the US (GMF). The contents of the blog are the sole responsibility of the author and can not be taken to reflect the views of the donors.