Posted on

No Bribe-Related Cases in Special State Prosecution’s Office

Author: PR Centar

There are no cases of bribing or receiving bribes in the Special State Prosecutor’s Office, which is the most important criminal offense in the field of corruption related offenses, as stated at the second panel of Institute Alternative (IA).

At the second panel “Repressive Fight against Corruption”, Public Policy Researcher at the Institute Alternative, Dina Bajramspahić, said that last year’s Report on the work of the Special Prosecutor’s Office shows that 15 prosecutors had cases against 1.229 persons.

“It is impossible to compare the data from the work reports of police, prosecutor’s offices and courts because our police reports on criminal offenses and criminal charges, the prosecutor’s offices report on persons while courts report on cases. Hence, we have analysed results of the Special State Prosecutor’s Office,” explained Bajramspahić.

She noted that order to conduct investigation was issued for 168 persons, which is only 13.6 percent of the total number.

“This leads to thinking that priorities must be determined in the work of this Prosecutor’s Office. If this is compared to all the reports on Montenegro that show that corruption is widespread, and that problem of organized crime in Montenegro is pronounced, these cases remain outside of cases in the work of the Special State Prosecutor’s Office,”Bajramspahić said.

She explained that 15 prosecutors of the Special Prosecutor’s Office filed charges against ten persons last year, although proceedings are still ongoing for 555 persons.

“In addition, there were 32 plea agreements, which we consider to be an effective solution. However, all of these agreements were within four cases,” Bajhramspahić explained.

She said that there were no cases of giving or receiving bribes in the Special State Prosecutor’s Office.

“The Special State Prosecutor’s Office received only one bribe report, and even that one was not within its jurisdiction, but was handed over to the competent prosecutor’s office. They had cases against five persons from the previous period, but these are still ongoing. Somewhere in this big pile of cases, huge number of persons and media allegations, giving and receiving bribes have been lost, which is the most important criminal offense in the field of corruption related offenses, “Bajhramspahić said.

She assessed that institutional framework in Montenegro is not completed, and that the Police Directorate and the Special State Prosecutor’s Office “are not working in full capacity and there is room for its improvement.”

Acting Director of the Office for the Suppression of Corruption and Organized Crime in the State Attorney’s Office of Croatia (USKOK), Tamara Laptoš, pointed out that the work of this body contributed to closing Chapter 23 and 24 in the negotiation process, and thus to Croatia’s accession to the European Union (EU).

“USKOK had continuously reported to the European Commission on the progress achieved in this area and presented the results achieved. However, regardless of EU membership, this does not mean that the fight against corruption is completed. Regardless of all of our results, a lot of work is ahead of us, “Laptoš said.

She stated that there are very few verdicts in relation to the number of opened investigations and charges brought against top state officials.

According to her, the length of proceedings and the lack of timely proceedings have influenced the perception of Croatia’s citizens about corruption.

“It has also influenced the European Commission’s 2018 report, which states that there is a lack of interest by the Government for implementing anti-corruption activities which presents a permanent problem, and which ultimately indicates that the fight in this regard is not over,” assessed Loptaš.

She said that changes of legislative and institutional framework had a significant role in the fight against corruption.

“In regard to institutional framework, I would highlight 2009 when the new Criminal Procedure Act entered into force, which introduced prosecutorial investigation of cases under the jurisdiction of USKOK. This represented a significant change of work mode and required previous education, ensuring of technical conditions for work, greater involvement of prosecutors and greater work responsibility, “Laptoš said.

She said that other significant novelty introduced by the Law was the possibility of reaching a verdict on the basis of an agreement between a prosecutor and a defendant, in the case when he or she pleas guilty.

“The number of verdicts made on the basis of parties’ agreement is increasing each year. This is a very good sign because such verdicts contribute to speeding up proceedings, to more efficient and cost-effective management of proceedings, duration of criminal proceedings is shortened, there is less burden for courts and attorneys, “Laptoš said.

She said that although these two frameworks are important prerequisites for fighting corruption, they alone are insufficient to achieve expected results.

“We apply a proactive approach when working on specific cases. It is essential that if you want to open a complex case of corruption at the highest level, you work actively on collecting information from the very beginning when a certain information appears. We collect evidence ourselves, sometimes in cooperation with other state bodies, but there are a lot of cases we do on our own, “Laptoš said.

She said that USKOK, during its development, also worked on the creation of inter-institutional cooperation, and that international cooperation is a very important segment.

“There is an increasing number of cases of international character in our work, and without efficient international cooperation we cannot process them,” Laptoš said.

She said that it is necessary to inform citizens about how and to whom they can report corruption, and about anonymous reporting of corruption.

“It is necessary to provide them with information on what constitutes corruption in criminal law. We in the office, we do not only act on anonymous reports, but we also receive applicants. Last year, we had a conversation, received a criminal report or given advice to 605 applicants, “Laptoš said.

Head of the Department for Suppression of Organized Crime and Corruption in the Police Directorate of Montenegro, Saša Milić, said that the fight against corruption and organized crime presents a priority for the Police Directorate.

“Link between corruption and crime with some police and customs bodies, as well as some local government bodies has been recognized,” Milić said.

He clarified that Department for Combating Organized Crime and Corruption works within the criminal police sector and within it the Anti-Corruption Unit has been formed.

“The second part refers to the Department for Combating Economic Crime, which is positioned to fight corruption related offenses. With new organizational changes within the Prosecutor’s Office and the Police, the Special Police Department has been formed, which supports the Chief Special Prosecutor and deals with criminal acts of high public officials, “Milić explained.

According to him, 46 criminal reports were filed with the prosecutor during the last year.

“Criminal reports were filed against 74 physical and four legal entities, with 76 corruption-related offenses reported. In criminal cases, five of them had the character of organized crime,” Milić said.

The structure of the criminal offenses, as he said, is dominated by the criminal offenses of abuse of office, abuse of office in economic activities, abuse of office in economy.

“Material damage caused by these acts amounts to about 12.5 million euros,” Milić said.

He explained that 19 crimes were committed in the public sector, of which, eight were committed on the national and 11 on the local level.

“With regard to the first three quarters of this year, ten criminal reports were filed, involving 22 corruption related offenses, and four cases of organized crime,” Milić said.

Member of the Association of Public Prosecutors of Serbia, Lazar Lazović, stated that effective control over police can contribute to more active and better fight against organized crime, assessing that it is necessary to strengthen staff capacities of units within the Police Directorate.

“When it comes to some high profile cases, the question is whether police officers would in that case respond to the prosecution’s request, knowing that we cannot harm them, except that we can order initiation of disciplinary proceedings, or they would listen to their superiors “Lazović said.

He further noted that within the framework of risk assessment of investigation and prosecution of corruption, judges and prosecutors have unanimously stated that a greater degree of independence of judiciary would contribute to the fight against corruption.

“It is essential that system solutions are set in a way that the system is functional in terms of independence and the ability to operate efficiently. The prosecutor’s office should go towards the path of independence and get wings to do its job freely, “Lazović said.

He said that the newest report of the European Commission is not very good and that it indicates that there is a fear of excessive influence of politics on the judiciary.

Panel discussion “Towards Qualitative Signs of Anti-corruption Efficacy” was organized in the framework of the project under the same title, which is implemented by the IA with the financial support of the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

 

Posted on

Institutions to Be More Proactive in the Fight against Corruption

Author: PR Center

Montenegro will not be ready to conclude the EU accession negotiations in due time, if anti-corruption institutions continue to work at the current pace, said Stevo Muk, President of the Managing Board of the Institute Alternative (IA).

At the panel discussion “Towards Qualitative Signs of the Anti-corruption Efficacy” organized by IA, Muk said this the organization will continue to deliver “unpleasant truths” and offer recommendations for better practices and more effective work.

“We cannot and must not do the work of a spokesperson for the Government and state organs. There are people who are paid to do this, “Muk said.

Civil society needs a government that seeks criticism, “and not a government that condemns criticism and critics”, he stated.

“We believe that the process of European integration is a prerequisite for reforms, especially in the area of rule of law and that the process of European integration, with all its ups and downs, is the key transformational power of our society,” Muk said.

He stated that trust in the European integration is not an obstacle for criticizing the EU approach.

“We ask for clearer and more stringent benchmarks and a tougher approach, especially in Chapters 23 and 24. Accordingly, we are open to give our contribution to the documents that the Government and the European Commission need to prepare during this and the coming year, so that further dynamics on this path is more clear for everyone” , Muk said.

Head of the EU Delegation to Montenegro, Aivo Orav, said that corruption does not present a single illegal act, but that it freezes institutions, hampers the work of the judiciary and harms the quality of democracy.

“Therefore, we need to be determined in fight against corruption. It is in the interest of all of us to do this, “Orav said.

According to him, corruption in Montenegro remains prevalent in many areas and this remains a cause for concern.

“Operational capacities of institutions have been improved, but all institutions need to demonstrate more proactive approach. This is especially the case with the Agency for the Prevention of Corruption. Management and staff of the Agency should ensure maximum transparency, integrity, impartiality and accountability. This was not the case with the decisions about members of the Council of the Radio and Television of Montenegro (RTCG), “Orav said.

The EU, as he said, will continue to be a key partner of Montenegro in the fight against corruption.

Secretary General of the National Integrity Agency in Romania, Silviu Ioan Popa, said that this Agency has never been subjected to political pressure and that independence and full authority were first conditions it needed secured.

“It is also important that the methodology we use is clear and all cases are treated in the same way. The third key to success is that we have access to all the information in Romania. We have access to bank accounts, documents related to private life. Usually we get this information right away and we do not have to wait long, “Popa said.

He further noted that the National Integrity Agency of Romania cooperates with non-governmental organizations and media.

“In Romania, every year we receive hundreds of cases by media and NGOs. They can follow the flow of these cases and present it to the citizens. In this way, public trust is gained. Because having an anti-corruption institution that the public does not trust presents a failure from the very beginning, “Popa said.

He said that in Romania they had initiated investigations by reading newspaper and that 90 percent of investigations were initiated of its own motion. 

“Now this ratio is reversed. We receive hundreds of information and submissions from ordinary citizens every day. This means that citizens have become more familiar with our work. We have noticed that it is very important how informed citizens are and their level of awareness, “Popa said.

Member of the Council of the Agency for the Prevention of Corruption in Montenegro, Vanja Ćalović Marković, said that the work of the Agency is characterized by distinct non-transparency.

“There is a big problem with access to information, not only when it comes to NGOs, but also when it comes to citizens, and even members of the Council. Since the establishment of the Agency, according to its official data, there has been no more buying of votes, IDs, party employment. So, this is the only institution in Montenegro that does not see what is seen from Brussels and Washington, “said Ćalović Marković.

According to her, the Agency for the Prevention of Corruption is a “trained tiger, which has been trained by the ruling party”.

The interpretation of the Agency, which, according to Ćalović Marković, is most problematic is that the Agency only deals with assets of public officials that have been acquired since the beginning of 2016, i.e, since its establishment.

“This is essentially a silent abolition of public officials for illegal acquisition of assets up until 2016. The Agency dared to draw the line and say – what you have stolen is stolen, now we are here and we will try to not catch you in the coming period as well, “said Ćalović Marković.

She stated that the key problems in the work of the Agency are politicization and selectivity.

“And above all, the problem is non-transparency. Because public disclosure means showing how much they do not work, the Agency is trying to get as little information about its work as possible to the public, “said Markovic Ćalović.

Former member of the Anti-Corruption Agency’s Committee in Serbia, Božo Drašković, said that there are no institutions without responsible and independent people in them, who are publicly available and ready to bear the consequences of what they are doing.

“Institutions are made of people and we never go a step further to say who is sitting in these institutions and what they do in them. This means personalized, and there lies key problem as to why the system does not work or works poorly when it comes to preventing corruption and conflict of interest” Drašković said.

According to him, the problem of conflict of interest is always more difficult to solve when it comes to someone high on the scale of political power.

“It is easy to remove a director of an elementary or high school because he pushed for a decision to employ his or her cousin ​​in school. In this case, we are rigorous and rightly so. But when it comes to a minister, it is hard to make a progress, even though you have complete evidence of conflict of interest” Drašković explained.

He said he does not believe “a single politician who works for a thousand euros”.

“You are so capable that you can earn tens of thousands of euros a month, but you choose to take the trouble to work for a thousand euros for our benefit. When I look at your expenses, I see you have a much larger amount of money. I wonder where it comes from, but we have never managed to investigate this, “Drašković said.

Former President of the Commission for the Resolution of Conflicts of Interest, Dalija Orešković, said the most sensitive cases are those establishing that someone is in a situation of potential conflict of interest, as well as situations in which “an official violated ethical norms of acting”.

“Circumstances of one’s private life can influence his or her impartiality. The role of the bodies in charge of conflict of interest is to say – this is a potential conflict of interest and this official is expected to be removed from such situation in a timely manner, “Orešković said.

In order to have less corruptive actions and corruptive activities, it is necessary to achieve a certain synergy in the society as a whole.

“There must be a reaction not only from bodies obliged to do something within their competencies, but also from the public and citizens. The moment when the standards of what can or cannot be tolerated take roots in most of the citizens, then this bodies will achieve its ultimate goal” Orešković said.

The panel discussion “Towards Qualitative Signs of the Anti-corruption Efficacy” was organized in the framework of the project under the same title, implemented by the Institute Alternative with the financial support of the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

 

Posted on

New Law Provisions Further Restrict the Public’s Right to Know: Data under Lock and Key, Backed by the Agency

Non-governmental organisations point out absurdity in rejecting old requests based on new legal restrictions, while member of the Agency’s Senate, Radenko Lacmanović, warns that data can be declared tax and business secret for indefinite period of time.

Again everything can be hidden from the public.

This is a consequence of last year’s Amendments to the Law on Free Access to Information (LoFAI), on the basis of which state bodies increasingly often classify requested data as a business or tax secret for an indefinite period of time. The Agency for Personal Data Protection and Free Access to Information follows their lead when deciding on complaints.

Collocutors of Center for Investigative Journalism in Montenegro (CIN-CG) claim that the Agency, when deciding on complaints as a second-instance body, refers to new provisions even in the old cases initiated prior to May 2017 when the law was amended.

Vuk Janković, MANS

Legal Programme Coordinator at MANS, Vuk Janković, illustrates this with the case that this NGO initiated in 2014, when it requested from the Tax Administration records of conducted controls over “Montenegro Tabaco Company” Ltd Podgorica.

“In its response, the Tax Administration restricted access to information not by referring to the provisions of the LoFAI, but only to the Law on Tax Administration. We filed a complaint with the Agency at the end of March 2014 and it was only in January this year, after the expiration of all possible legal deadlines, that the Agency made a decision in which it refers to the new provision of the law, which at the time of filing the request or the complaint did not even exist ” , explains Janković.

In this way, according to him, the Agency has committed gross violations, since the latest amendments foresee that the proceeding initiated before the entry into force of these amendments, will be terminated pursuant to the earlier law.

“MANS then complained to the Administrative Court, which, deciding on the complaint, also rejected our allegations, ignoring the fact that the Agency was under an obligation to make a decision in accordance with the provisions of the earlier version of the LoFAI. We consider this court decision to be scandalous because the court should be among first to guarantee the protection from such a blatant violation of the law. Dissatisfied with such a decision, in mid-March 2018, we filed a request for extraordinary review of the decision to the Supreme Court of Montenegro, and this procedure is still ongoing, “highlighted Janković.

He says that access to numerous information has been restricted to this NGO by referring to the new provision of the law. Among them is information on all giro and foreign currency accounts of political parties, customs declarations issued by the Customs Administration to Uniprom, or information on who is exempt from paying customs duties on construction materials, equipment and installations for the construction of highway.

Member of the Council of the Agency, Radenko Lacmanović, also considers last year’s amendments to the Law a step backwards.

“It is particularly problematic that the amendments which caused most commotion in the public were proposed and adopted overnight, even without the knowledge of the Government, or at least this was stated by the Ministry of Culture,” Lacmanović said.

He claims that he pointed out the disputed provision relating to tax and business secret:

Radenko Lacmanović

“To make it even more absurd, the proposers have not amended Article 15, which refers to deadlines in case of restriction to the access to information or part of it. Thus, it remained that when it comes to business and tax secrets there are no deadlines for expiry of reasons for restricting access to information, and the Agency can hardly review them. I also pointed out that Article 1 significantly restricts the public’s right to know and that it needs to be supplemented, “Lacmanović pointed out. This provision stipulates that LoFAI does not apply to information that is subject to confidentiality obligation.

The member of the Agency’s Council replied that it is true that the first-instance bodies when restricting access to information, or part of it, often refer to business and tax secret.

“On several occasions at the Council’s sittings I have pointed out that this may be the reason for not granting free access to information, but that it does not have to be this way. Namely, all six points of paragraph 1 of Article 14 may be one of the reasons, but that does not mean they must be. For this reason, we in the Council as a second-instance body, we do not always have to confirm the decision of the authorities that rejected a request by referring primarily to point 6. This is why we are a body reviewing first instance decisions, which means that we may have a different stance from the first instance bodies, “Lacmanović said.

He considers that the Council should in practice use the possibilities under Article 40 of the Law and request information from government bodies in order to assess why a particular document or agreement was declared business or tax secret.

However, Lacmanović acknowledges that the practice of the Agency’s Council is to accept first instance decisions rejecting requests for free access to information in all cases. He is not familiar with a case such as the MANS one, where the Agency rejected complaint to the decision issued by a state body prior to May last year, whereby the reason was business or tax secret. He said that this would mean that there was an ommission.

In the new EC Report for Montenegro it is written that 5.577 requests for free access to information were made last year, and that requested data was not provided in 1.951 cases.

The Agency for Personal Data Protection and Free Access to Information received 1.086 complaints, of which it upheld 356. Most were cases of “administrative silence”. The report states that it is a matter of concern that most complaints refer to cases where the requests remained unanswered by the public institutions.

The document notes that the Administrative Court ruled in 12 cases against the public body’s decision not to grant access to information but that court decisions are not effectively enforced.

According to the Report, public institutions urgently need to improve implementation of the law and comply with requests for access to information, especially in areas where there is a risk of corruption.

Companies Quietly Moved Out of Public Reach

Public Policy Researcher at the Institute Alternative (IA), Milena Milošević, claims that amendments to the LoFAI have not only been drafted without a public discussion, but also outside of the scope of strategic framework, which allegedly aims at greater openness of the public administration.

“Paradoxically, neither the Government nor the Agency for the Protection of Personal Data and Free Access to Information are tracking effects of solutions that have been” pulled through “in the Parliament,” Milošević said.

She noted that in parallel with this, in Serbia, there is a wider civil society action against exclusion of state-owned companies from the scope of application of their law. She points out that in Montenegro, much of the business of so-called public companies was quietly moved out of reach of the public, by introducing tax and business secret.

“If we look at this in the context of amendments to the Law on State Administration, which exempts bodies from obligation to conduct public discussion on budget issues, instead of empowering citizens there is an ongoing process of ” disarming” them. The basic principle of democracy is government for the people, but if the people do not have mechanisms to review the efficiency of government through public spending, then the question arises for whom there is government in Montenegro: for citizens or for those who have an interest in hiding their “business” from the public “concluded Milošević.

Milena Milošević

In the IA Draft report “Towards Better Administration”, in which CIJ-MNE had insight, it is written that negative effects of the disputed provisions of LoFAI can already be felt through rejection of access to information related to public debt management and tax obligations of Montenegrin municipalities.

Also, the report states that IA has already faced negative effects of rejecting access to information with justification that it concerns a tax secret.

Namely, this NGO was denied access to copies of reports on the implementation of the Tax Administration’s Plan for debt management and strengthening tax collection measures for the period 2017-2021 and information on fulfillment of the obligations of 16 municipalities based on tax rescheduling agreement, under the pretense that it concerns tax secret.

By this interpretation, IA considers, public administration bodies that are primarily in the service of citizens are treated the same way as private companies, and the public remains deprived of data that is very important for assessing their efficiency.

Author: Ana Komatina

The article 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.