Posted on

For the Parliament which interferes in its work

We have sent 22 proposals for work plans of the parliamentary committees; we propose discussions on budget execution during the year, more involvement of the Parliament in monitoring and defining reforms and better communication with parliamentary oversight institutions.

We have sent proposals to committees for economy, finance and budget, for security and defence, for anticorruption, for human rights and freedom and for political system, judiciary and administration.

The Committee on Economy, Finance and Budget should request and consider a report on budget execution in the first six months of 2021. In this way, the Committee would prevent budget execution from being discussed too late and insufficiently. This Committee should address in more detailed way the delays in establishing a functional register of state property and budget inspection, as well as internal financial controls in the public sector. It is necessary to organise an expert discussion with decision makers and experts in the field of management of companies in which the state has majority ownership. These companies spend almost a billion euros a year, employ about 12 000 people and over 300 public officials.

As the implementation of the Public Financial Management Reform Program was largely conditioned by projects funded by the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA), we have invited the Committee on Economy, Finance and Budget to organise a hearing on their implementation.

We have suggested to the Security and Defence Committee to organise visits to the competent institutions in order to control the application of secret surveillance measures. Consideration of the semi-annual budget execution in the security and defence for the current year as well as consideration of the reports of internal audits of institutions in this sector would also significantly improve parliamentary oversight. Bearing in mind that the exceeding of police powers marked numerous events in the previous period, we proposed the organisation of a control hearing regarding the application of police powers. On the other hand, having in mind that the procurement in security and defence area has been in a legal vacuum for a long time, we believe that it is necessary to organise a consultative hearing on this topic, with an emphasis on the application and improvement of the regulatory framework.

The Anticorruption Committee is the parent committee for the work of the Agency for the Prevention of Corruption. “Contrary to the current practice of considering only the annual report on the work of the Agency for the Prevention of Corruption, the Committee should consider all quarterly reports that the Agency continuously prepares and publishes”, is one of the proposals that we have submitted to this body. Moreover, we believe that more attention should be paid to the reports of the European Commission and the so-called working papres (non papers) on Chapters 23 and 24. It is also necessary to organise a series of consultative hearings on further activities and plans in combating corruption in high-risk areas (public procurement, privatisation, urbanism, education, health, local government and police).

The Committee on Political System, Judiciary and Administration should not be left out in further public administration reform. The results so far are not enough, especially in terms of optimisation of public administration and this is confirmed by two external assessments. As the assessment of the impact of previous reforms is indispensable in determining reform priorities in the coming period, we believe that the discussion on these issues should include the organisation of a consultative hearing regarding to the assessment of the impact of public administration reform and the preparation of a new strategy for 2021-2025. Due to the importance of service provision and the exercise of rights, this Committee should consider these reports separately on the acting in the administrative matters and the state of electronic services with measures for their improvement.

Changes to the so-called Prosecutorial laws should be implemented with the full participation of the public and through the organisation of a consultative hearing before the parent committee. On the other hand, we believe that evidence-based discussion in the parent committee would contribute to the reform of the civil service system, especially in the light of the fact that such a discussion was absent when determining the latest amendments to the Law on Civil Servants and State Employees in December 2020.

Bearing in mind that the number of public gatherings has increased during the previous period, as well as the challenges associated with them, we believe that the Committee on Human Rights and Freedoms should consider the report of the Ministry of Interior Affairs on public gatherings and events. Moreover, it should adopt conclusions and recommendations with the application of standards in this area. The report of the Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms should be devoted to more substantive discussion and time, with the organisation of control hearings based on the report’s findings, especially representatives of those institutions where drastic violations of the law and discriminatory treatment were recorded. We also believe that at special thematic sessions, this body should consider the findings and recommendations from the relevant reports of the European Commission, which relate to respect for human rights.

Take a look to the all Institute Alternative’s proposals. (in Montenegrin

Milena Muk, Public Policy Researcher, Institute Alternative

Posted on

Falling Short of Commitments: How Western Balkan Governments Fight Organised Crime

Organised crime (OC) is recognised as one of the key problems, not only in Montenegro and other countries of the Western Balkans, but also in Europe. Although OC is widespread, the number of criminal organisations operating in Montenegro has not been precisely identified. Bearing in mind that organised criminal groups operate across countries’ borders, it is not enough for only Montenegro to be involved in the fight against their activities. It is necessary to cooperate with the institutions of other countries, especially the police, as well as with international organisations that deal with this topic. Montenegro has established a legal framework for the fight against organised crime in line with the EU acquis. Most information in this area are available, thanks to the obligation to report to the EU on the results in the context of accession negotiations. Although Montenegro has made some progress in this area, there are many problems and challenges it faces in practice.

Organised criminal groups from Montenegro also operate outside its borders and are mainly involved in drug smuggling from Latin America to Europe. They wage violent gang wars, participate in shootings across Europe and cause much violence in the region. Almost 50 people have lost their lives in the five-year war between two Montenegrin criminal clans - Škaljar and Kavač - which was fought all over Europe.

The fight against organised crime has been one of the priorities in the area of the rule of law since the opening of accession negotiations with the European Union in 2012. However, in all its earlier reports, the European Commission has emphasised the need for a more proactive approach in the fight against this phenomenon. Also, it is important to note that the government in Montenegro has changed in 2020, after thirty years, and that a new dynamic is expected in this area.

Posted on

Institute Alternative with the rapporteurs of the Venice Commission

President of the Managing Board at Institute Alternative, Stevo Muk, participated yesterday, March 1st, in a round table of rapporteurs of the Venice Commission and representatives of NGOs from Montenegro.

The Minister of Justice, Human and Minority Rights in the Government of Montenegro requested an opinion of the Venice Commission on proposals of two laws that would change legislation in the prosecution area. Preparation and adoption of this opinion is planned for the next Plenary Session of the Venice Commission, which will be held on March 19-20, 2021.

On Monday and Tuesday, March 1-2, 2021, the rapporteurs of the Venice Commission will have a series of online meetings with representatives of the Montenegrin administration: MPs, prosecutors, etc.

The rapporteurs of the Venice are Antonio Enriques GASPAR, a member of the Executive Committee from Portugal, Mr. Myron NICOLATOS, a member of the Executive Committee from Cyprus and Mr. James HAMILTON, a former member of the Executive Committee from the Republic of Ireland.

Posted on

We asked the Government for concrete steps, reliable reporting and greater public participation

We sent 26 suggestions for the Government’s Work Program, which are aimed at legislative initiatives for more efficient public administration reform and better rule of law, but also at publishing long-hidden information.

Considering long-term activities of Institute Alternative in the areas of public finance, public administration and the rule of law, today we sent 26 suggestions with the list of legislative initiatives to the Government of Montenegro, as well as analysis and reports necessary to create preconditions for better results in these areas.

We asked for the opening of important data on public money spending and better reporting on the work of institutions and public officials. Compiling the information on the use of 130 million budget reserve during 2020 is one of the necessary steps in opening public finances. Although the high level of indebtedness of local self-governments conditioned the conclusion of contracts between 16 local self-governments and the Ministry of Finance in 2015, last time the public was informed about the dynamic of fulfilling contractual obligations was in 2016. We have therefore sought to compile new comprehensive information on compliance with these contracts.

Information on important procedures, such as oversight by the Administrative Inspection and the conduct of public procurement, has become a side note in the annual reports of line ministries. We believe that public procurement should be given due attention, by publishing important information that used to be, but is no longer there. We primarily mean the list of companies that earn the most from public procurement per year, as well as reporting on the implementation of public procurement in areas of special risk for corruption (health, education, public works) and the so-called confidential procurement (security and defense procurement). The report of the Administrative Inspection should contain a clear relationship between the identified irregularities and their elimination after the performed supervision, with an emphasis on the identified irregularities in the employment procedures in the public administration.

Amendments to the Law on the Special State Prosecution Office (SPO) must improve the semi-annual and annual reports on the work of the SPO, including the provision of information on the complexity of cases and on rejected criminal charges against applicants. Proactive publication of indictments should also be prescribed by legal amendments. We also believe that the Law on Personal Data Protection should be amended in such a way that it explicitly prescribes the right of access to verdicts for public officials, without the prior consent of the public official to whom the verdict was pronounced.

Budget execution is also among our priorities. The Government should make a step forward, by finally enabling timely public information on budget execution during the current year. This means making a semi-annual report on the execution of the budget in 2021. Current temporary funding in particular must be accompanied by increased accountability and transparency of budget spending. The Government should also send the proposal of the Law on the Final Account of the Budget for 2019, because last year was the first year in which this Law was not adopted. It is also necessary for the Government to adopt a measurable Action plan for the implementation of the recommendations of the State Audit Institution. These recommendations were given in the report submitted in October 2020 with the proposal of the Law on Final Budget Account, but in the meantime withdrawn from the parliamentary procedure.

Implementation delay of the laws that should contribute more responsible public finance, especially with regard to the establishment of a single register of state property and budget inspection, marked the previous period. However, so far there has been no proactive analysis of obstacles to the implementation of these legal obligations or identification of measures to overcome them. Therefore, we requested the compilation of information on obstacles to the establishment of the budget inspection, records of state property and electronic register, with the proposal of emergency measures for overcoming current situation. On the other side, the work of majority state-owned enterprises must be further regulated – by a special act or amendment to the existing Company Law – in order to introduce mechanisms through which the state could manage enterprises more efficiently and better, and be more transparent and accountable for the entrusted business and the property they managed.

Public participation should not be a decoration of decision-making procedures when everything has already been decided. That is why we proposed that the Government, by timely organising a public debate on the budget for 2022, for the first time fully involved the public in the adoption of the budget. We also called for an amendment to the Regulation that regulates the membership of NGO representatives in working groups for drafting laws and strategies, in order to enable greater representation of civil society representatives and to ensure that those organisations dealing with horisontal issues (such as gender equality) are not prevented from giving their contribution.

The participation of the public and stakeholders in the development of specifications for important portals and websites managed by the Government would also significantly contribute to the openness of the decision-making process. We believe that by conducting public consultation on the much-needed redesign of the e-Government and the Open Data portal, the Government can show that it is important for it that electronic services and portals essentially respond to our needs.

We also recommended the necessary normative activities, with the aim of professionalisation of public administration. The current Law on Civil Servants and State Employees suffers from a number of shortcomings, especially with regard to composition of Commission for proficiency testing and wide discretion in making the final decision on the selection of civil servants. Evaluation of staff performance is also not well regulated, especially in terms of defining work objectives and providing feedback on performance.

We called on the Government to propose the repeal of the articles of the Law on Maintenance of Residential Buildings that are used as a basis for solving the housing needs of public officials.

In the suggestions, we give recommendations for better reporting on obligations within the negotiations with the European Union, especially on Chapters 23 and 24, but also detailed explanations for adoption of the Law on Protector of Property and Legal Interest of Montenegro and for amendments on the Law on Prevention of Corruption, the Criminal Procedure Code and the Regulation governing the procurement in the security and defence sector.

Our suggestions can be found here (in Montenegrin).

Posted on

Government to re-propose the adoption of the Law on the Final Account of the Budget

The forgotten SAI’s recommendations

Last year was the first one in which the Law on the Final Account of the Budget was not adopted and the first in more than a decade in which the Parliament did not adopt recommendations of the State Audit Institution (SAI) as its conclusions and obliged the Government to its implementation and reporting.

The proposals of the acts submitted by the previous Government to the previous convocation of the Parliament have been archived, and among them was the Proposal of the Law on the Final Account of the Budget for 2019. 

The report on the audit of the final account, which the State Audit Institution submitted to the Parliament in mid-October 2020 is far more important than the discussion on the final account, which is a review of budget execution. MPs must discuss this report, in accordance with the current practice and adopt the SAI’s recommendations as their conclusions and oblige the new Government to correct the shortcomings of the previous one.

SAI gave a negative opinion on the way the budget was managed in 2019, from the aspect of compliance with the law, with a diversion of attention in the part of a financial audit. SAI has given 44 recommendations to the Government on how to fix the identified problems, which is twice as many as in the audit of the previous final account. It is a good practice for the Parliament to adopt these recommendations as its conclusions, thus strengthening their obligation to the Government to report on its implementation.

We call on the Government to re-propose the adoption of the Law on the Final Account of the Budget, and the Parliament to discuss the Report on the audit of the final account as soon as possible. Moreover, the Parliament should adopt conclusions that will oblige the Government to correct major systemic problems identified by SAI.

The important conclusion that the Parliament must adopt this time is about the quality and structure of Action plan for implementation of SAI’s recommendations. The former Government reported on the fulfilment of SAI’s recommendations superficially and through a formally made Action plan, continuing the bad tradition which we criticised earlier. It is necessary for the new Government to prepare an Action plan for the implementation of SAI’s recommendations, which will finally have clear deadlines, defines specific actions to be taken, indicators that will measure whether something has been implemented and precisely defined stakeholders. In addition to new recommendations, an integral part of this plan are the unfilled recommendations from the previous year (two thirds of the total number), which must not be forgotten.

Marko Sošić
Public Policy Researcher

Posted on

Are Citizens In The First Place For Public Administration?

The first day of the regional conference ‘’Citizens first’’ was held in Belgrade today. We organised the event within the Think for Europe Network, as part of WeBER 2.0, a regional initiative dedicated to empowering civil society and citizens to be more willing to monitor and control the public administration reform process.

Tamara Srzentić, Minister of Public Administration, Digital Society and Media of Montenegro, said in her introduction that “when the community gathers to solve problems, anything is possible”. She added that sometimes happens that planning and implementation are not well connected. “This policies can be compared to a car that is loosely connected to the wheels – you will not get where you wanted and you will hurt many people in your way”, said Srzentić.

Srzentić said that policies should be made “starting with the users”, that is, to have them in the foreground. “The Government cannot do it alone – if you are part of the community, which we all are, we can help governments create a society that benefits us all”, said Srzentić.

Milena Lazarević, the Program Director of the Center for European Policies (CEP), which leads WeBER 2.0 project, pointed out the fact that the governments in the regions are implementing reforms “only for Brussels”, and not for their citizens. “Through many cases, it can be seen that when laws are passed and policies are considered, drafts are sent to Brussels and international actors, but public consultations, which should be at the heart of the process, are often not held”, said Lazarević.

Mirjam Feran, Director of Strategy and Turkey at the European Commission’s general Directorate for Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy (DG NEAR) said that a well-functioning administration is the one where processes and institutions are created to meet the needs of society by using resources at their disposal.

“We want to create a system based on partnership that works in both directions – for both civil society and the administration. This relationship is sensitive because sometimes there are obstacles, but also misconceptions. Therefore, it is important to build a trust between civil society and public administration”, she added, emphasising that it is not an easy thing to do. “Issues of working with the government, administration and improving the functioning of public administration, as well as the importance of transparency and inclusiveness, is something that EU countries are constantly working on, because it should never stop”, concluded Ferran.

Hata Kujraković, a student from Sarajevo, who spoke as a youth representative, that said young people from entire region were very disappointed with the situation. Young people are especially frustrated and discouraged when they see how the public sector is employing through connections. “It is very demoralising when we see that all the money, effort, time we have invested in education and personal development, the sacrifices we have made – are simply not enough because we do not have ”connections”. Because of this feeling of despair, it seems  that we have only one thing left – to leave”, she said.

Gregor Virant, Director of SIGMA – a joint initiative of the OECD and the European Union and former Minister of Public Administration of Slovenia aimed at supporting the reform of administration of countries in the process of EU accession, added that “expectations of the speed of progress on the EU path in the region are high’’.

“We have to understand that things will not happen over night; reforms are a long process. We should not overestimate what can be done in two years, but we should not underestimate what can be done in 10 years”, concluded Virant.

At the conference, we presented the results of monitoring the implementation of public administration reform in the period 2019/2020 in all Western Balkan countries. Monitoring is conducted in six areas of public administration reform: strategic framework for public administration reform, policy development and coordination, civil service system and human resources management, accountability, service delivery and public finance management. Monitoring results were presented through six panels with representatives of the civil sector and administration.

We continue the event tomorrow – the agenda and tracking data are available here and you can follow us live on our Facebook account.