SELDI Network: Call for Proposals

The Southeast European Leadership for Development and Integrity (SELDI), through its grants coordinator the Centres for Civic Initiatives (CCI), is seeking proposals for Support to Local Civil Society Organisations in Pursuing EU and Regional Anti-Corruption Agenda in IPA countries from the Western Balkans (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo , Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey).

The grant scheme is supported by the European Commission through financial assistance for the Project “Civil Society for Good Governance and Anti-Corruption in Southeast Europe: Capacity Building for Monitoring, Advocacy and Awareness Raising (SELDI)”.

The overall objective of this call for proposals is to provide support to local CSOs in pursuing the EU and regional anti-corruption agenda in the target countries, and in line with issues identified by the SELDI Regional Anti-corruption Report (RAR), the SELDI Corruption Monitoring System and the SELDI Strategy 2020.

The specific objective(s) of this call for proposals are: strengthening the grantees’ participation in regional networks and enhancing their capacity to analyse, monitor and advocate more effectively anti-corruption and anti-state capture measures and act as recognisable and credible agents of change through carrying out innovative demonstration activities.

The overall indicative amount made available under this call for proposals is EUR 60,000. Any grant requested under this call for proposals must fall between the following EUR 5,000 minimum and EUR 12,000 maximum amounts.

Deadline for submission of Concept note is 4 March 2019. Concept notes must be submitted electronically via email to: seldigrants@ccibh.org.

All the questions about the Call for proposals should be sent via e-mail, to seldigrants@ccibh.org. Deadline for submitting questions is 11 February 2019. 

Application package and additional information are available for downloading at the link bellow.

Application package and additional information

 

 

Blog: Opposition’s Response?

Judging by reactions, Djukanovic will also try to silence this affair with the power of ”independent” institutions. ”Come to institutions, let us convince you that the “first sister” is actually Duško Knežević, that Milo’s reputation is worth a million euros, that the 16 000 euros you get and do not pay back – is not a gift, that the 2 000 square-foot villa was built by itself, that Migo did not take the envelope to the post office, that only the sun of the authorities warms Montenegro and that without it comes only darkness and cataclysm.

By pressing the institutions in similar cases, opposition tried to fight for political and criminal responsibility in Parliament. Parliamentary investigations ended well for the DPS and bad for the opposition, which didn’t receive the resignation of officials, didn’t provoke a Government dismissal, and failed to politically valorise arguments at the following elections. Also, from “Telecom” to “Audio Recordings” affairs that reached the top of the regime were drowned in the corridors of police and prosecution.

Will this affair hit the walls of institutions – Wailing Wall for the Rule of Law? For example: Migo does something on probation, through the side hallway, and the DPS accountant does some misdemeanor, then again there is a fresh start: 2020 elections. The rest will go under investigation, until 2036.

It will, if everything remains the same in opposition, and if we don’t change and start more seriously to implement new political strategies and tactics.

In other words, there is no such affair that can shift the relations of political powers unless the opposition presents itself as a genuine political alternative, ready to do more, do better and do differently.

Political responsibility, as a precondition for all responsibilities, must be won in elections. This is the only way to ensure that what we have seen in these days, and what we will see, is not lost in the chambers of the “temple of democracy” and in the corridors of the prosecution.

It is unrealistic, and also dangerous, to expect that everything will happen spontaneously and without additional effort, that the regime will collapse on its own, that the DPS will leave the authority without a fight, and the opposition will enter abandoned institutions. The regime already brought media mercenaries, and the owners of agencies, representatives of prosecutor offices and the public broadcasting service have sworn publicly that will defend the beloved President to the last.

The opposition needs the political wisdom demonstrated in Budva, after all and despite everything that happened, which resulted in elegant resignation of an earlier one, and the appointment of new municipality president. In accordance with the agreement and the principles laid down, and in contrast of the announcement wars of the Democratic Front and the Democrats, which were ongoing for months and it looked like there is no hope for Budva. If it is possible to win in Budva, Kotor, Herceg Novi and Berane, it is also possible to find a cooperation model at the state level, and a framework for cooperation that gathers, reconciles and attracts not only old but also new voters of the opposition, as well as some parties (or parts of parties) who exercise authority at the state level.

I believe that there is increasing number of those in the Democratic Party of Socialists who start to see Đukanović as burden, and they are starting to question themselves and whether the entire party is at risk because of a wasted leader. Such people can distance themselves from Đukanović, and support justified demands of the opposition. But, until that point, which is still far away, something needs to be done.

The opposition can’t remain trapped in impersonal statements, in million times repeated words which paint the ”criminal regime” and seek resignation. It may be that one part of the governing coalition voters will really be disgusted with how they previously voted, but that still doesn’t mean that they will quickly switch to the opposition’s side. Anyway, they sure don’t vote for DPS because of Milo’s honesty. In order to ”cross to the other side of the river”, voters need to better understand and accept the political alternative they want to choose. Experience showed us that image cannot be represented by alienate opposition, in which everyone works for themselves and accuses others of not doing the right thing. The least common denominator of the opposition as a whole, is needed.

Several recent initiatives of opposition parties may be a good starting point for joint acting. Democrats gave a proposal to define common terms of parliamentary opposition for fair elections, and without accomplishment of this is impossible to hold the next parliamentary elections. The Social Democratic Party “called for a special session of the Parliament” and the SNP invited the opposition to meet and talk. Now almost all opposition parties talk openly about organising protests.

All initiatives and proposals can and must be discussed. No media, no bad memories, no conditioning, harsh words, etiquette. Establishing a dialogue with the aim of jointly answering to the questions: What to do in Parliament? What to do outside of Parliament? How to look for common terms of fair and democratic elections in 2020? What to demand from European Union as an urgently needed response to the state of emergency in the political and legal system?

Stevo Muk,

President of the Managing Board at Institute Alternative

WeBER findings: Public Finance Management

How transparent and accessible are budgetary documents? How do governments communicate and cooperate with public about public internal financial control (PIFC)? How do supreme audit institution’s (SAI) communicate and cooperate with the public pertaining to its work? Find out in this WeBER infographic, summarising the key findings of our regional Monitoring report:

Reaction of Coalition KUM to felling of cypresses in Bar

Local authorities must listen more carefully and responsibly to the voice of citizens

The Coalition for Transparency and Fight against Corruption at the Local Level (KUM) assesses that the felling of cypresses in Bar represents an example of non-functionality of local democracy which should be based on direct approach and transparency.

Unfortunately, institutes such as public discussions, consultative referendum, petitions, local community organisations, assembly of citizens, and similar, exist only as legal possibilities, but do not prevail in practice. Consequences can be seen also in this decision which is contrary to the expressed position of citizens of Bar.

Autor: Dado Pavlović

It is concerning that local parliament in Bar has overpassed the appeal of citizens to prevent the urban violence. And the local level of government should precisely be the one to have the special sensibility for their needs and initiatives. It was shown also that the position of authorities is opposed even to current mechanisms for protection of rights and freedoms, since not even the decision of authorised court instance – Administrative Court, was not waited on.

Coalition KUM points out the damage caused by the practices of executive and legislative powers, either on local or state level, which are ignoring their own obligation to inform the citizens with their plans alongside all possible consequences. Additionally, the formality of the proceedings, such as referring to stance that decision of one state body does not postpone execution of solution, or that formal procedures were complied with, does not in itself mean that this authority serves the public interest. The case of felling of cypresses in Bar, i.e. neglecting the strong and justified civic initiative, is an illustrative example of lack of clarity and dysfunctionality of civic initiatives and alienation of authorities.

Indeed, this issue has opened serious dilemma in regards of how to exercise two indisputably public interests but to the detriment of neither one of these interests – the necessity to build kindergarten and to preserve the park which had over 80 cypresses. Hence, it is natural and legitimate thing for citizens to opt about this directly themselves, for example, via referendum.

The Coalition KUM invites the authorised bodies, and primarily the Municipal Assembly of Bar, to acknowledge the new civic initiative for reconstruction of the park and to change the location of kindergarten’s construction, in order to at least partially mitigate the caused damage and to achieve the public interest. Only an effective involvement of citizens in local decision-making processes contributes to stability of that community and opens up opportunities for its progress.

The Coalition for Transparency and Fight against Corruption at the Local Level (KUM) consists of 18 CSOs as follows: Centre for Civic Education (CCE), Centre for Monitoring and Research (CeMI), UL-Info from Ulcinj, Institute Alternative (IA), Za Druga from Petrovac, Centre for Development of Non-Governmental Organisations (CDNGO), Juventas, Bonum from Pljevlja, Active Zone from Cetinje, Democratic Centre of Bijelo Polje, Centre for Investigative Journalism of Montenegro (CIJ MNE), Union of Doctors of Medicine of Montenegro, Centre for Security, Sociological and Criminological Research “Defendology” from Niksic, Monitoring Group Ulcinj – MogUL, Centre for Political Education from Niksic, NGO Da zazivi selo from Pljevlja, Monitor’s Centre for Democracy and Media (MCDM) and Association Dr Martin Schneider-Jacoby from Ulcinj.

The Coalition was formed within the framework of the project “Let’s Put Corruption into Museum!” implemented by the CCE in cooperation with partners and with the support of the EU Delegation to Montenegro and the Ministry of Public Administration of the Government of Montenegro. The views expressed in this announcement are the sole responsibility of the Coalition KUM and do not necessarily reflect the views of the EU and the Ministry of Public Administration.