Posted on

Public Policies Often Ignore Women’s Needs and Gender Gap

Gender neutral laws are one of the main factors of perpetuating gender inequality in Montenegro. Laws that are supposed to be ‘’equal for all’’ ignore the inequality of women in many areas – it was the conclusion of today’s conference organised by the Institute Alternative.

At the conference ‘’Gender Equality and Public Policies in Montenegro: More Than Quotas’’ there were presented key findings on the gender mainstreaming and public policies, with special focus on the laws in the field of labour, healthcare and entrepreneurship, which were adopted in 2019.

Nikoleta Pavićević (IA), the author of the analysis, said that although assessment of the impact that policies may have on the position of women and men is mandatory when making decisions, this legal duty is ignored by decision makers. She added that this is illustrated by the Labor Law, stipulating, due to the pressure by owners of companies, that women employed on short-term contracts who take pregnancy leave would not have that period count towards the 36-month term required to obtain permanent employment.

She pointed out that the improvement of women’s rights is often more a consequence of ‘’automatic’’ alignment of legal provisions with EU acquis, and not a result of analysis and consultations with women and men. Such harmonisation of legal solutions with EU acquis, although contributing to better protection of rights, is not based on a detailed analysis of the current situation and different practical and strategic needs of women and men in the sectors which address specific problems encountered by women in Montenegro.

Božena Jelušić, President of the Gender Equality Committee in the Parliament of Montenegro, pointed out the importance of a gender-sensitive Parliament, but also gender-sensitive budget planning. In that sense, her suggestion is to launch an initiative for additional empowerment of women through agro-budget and by proposing a special fund for women in agriculture.

She particularly pointed out the problem of representation of women in management positions in education. ‘’Although education is feminised, women are not in decision-making positions’’, she said. Moreover, she would initiate that in the selections of school principals, in the case of equal qualifications, preference is given to women.

Ivana Zečević, Head of the Directorate for Development of Small and Medium Business in the Ministry of Economic Development, said that we have a significant progress in the last five years when it comes to women who are business owners (7,000 of them) and that 14 municipalities have female entrepreneurship programs. She also announced that the Ministry of Economic Development will make a detailed evaluation of the achievements in the last four years and determine strategic directions, but also the main obstacles. She concluded that the progress has been made in creating a business environment, but not to extent of the women’s needs – where the issue of tax relief for women in the first years of business, as well as providing the funds are still the main issues.

Irena Joksimović, Head of the Directorate for Work Affairs in the Ministry of Economic Development, said that in certain parts of the new Labor Law, women’s rights have been significantly improved compared to the previous law. As significant improvements, she mentioned a day off for prenatal care visit for employed pregnant women, earlier use of parental leave by fathers in case of multiply pregnancy, as well as a pause for breastfeeding during working hours, which is extended from 60 minutes to 2 hours.

Nina Milović, Head of the Directorate for Organisation and Functioning of Health Care in the Ministry of Health Care, said that it is necessary to provide more comprehensive analysis of women’s health in the community, identification of health problems, women’s needs of all ages and risk factors to women’s health, so that women’s health care programs could be defined.

All conference participants agreed that the area of gender-based statistics is especially underdeveloped and the evidence is the fact that there are no reliable data about gender pay gap or a comprehensive database of women’s entrepreneurship.

During the discussion, the problem of abuse of contracts on temporary and occasional jobs were also discussed, as those are the contracts which are often concluded contrary to the law and which have negative effects on women’s position. Also, the importance of a gender analysis of the response to the coronavirus pandemic is emphasised, as well as advocacy in order to create a gender responsive support measures for women, especially for those in vulnerable groups, which were missing from previous packages of measures adopted during the pandemic.

The final version of the analysis presented at today’s conference, will be  available soon on the website of the Institute Alternative.

The analysis was made within the project ‘’More Than Quotas: Gender Mainstreaming and Public Policies in Montenegro’’, implemented by Institute Alternative, with financial support of the Ministry of Justice, Human and Minority Rights.

Posted on

Time for substantial reforms of public procurement in the security and defence sector

Author: PR Center

Lack of control, strategic procurement planning, as well as lack of reporting are the main problems related to procurement in the security and defence sector. It is necessary to implement substantial reforms, proactive internal and external controls, as well as identify corrupt practices in this area.

This is stated at the panel discussion ”Procurement in the security and defence sector: New „game rules”, old issues”, organised within the project ”For the better use of public money!’’. Institute Alternative conduct this project with financial support of the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

Stevo Muk, president of Managing Board at Institute Alternative, said that we have not yet witnessed significant progress in terms of public spending transparency for public procurement in general, and especially for those in the security and defence sector.

”Having in mind that Montenegro is a NATO member, we believe that those reforms should have happened much earlier. Our earlier research, similar to the one we present today, which was conducted in 2018 has shown that security procurement most often happens far from the eyes of the public, institutional and public control. The term confidential procurement has domiciliate in the regulations and the practice has fully justified that name’’, said Muk.

Although the regulations have changed slightly, the practice, as he pointed out, has remained the same.

”We believe that the time for substantial public procurement reforms in general has come. It is time for identifying corrupt practices and risks for corruption at all stages of public procurement, for more proactive internal and external control and for more responsibility of all stakeholders involved in the process from planning to execution and control of contract execution and especially more transparency and less discretionary powers in all stages of the process’’, concluded Muk.

Olivera Injac, the Minister of Defence of Montenegro, pointed out that the key goal is to improve normative and legal framework in the field of security and defence procurement, but also to pay attention to affirmation of transparency when conducting public procurement.

”It is obvious that this has not been the case so far. On the other hand, it is necessary to emphasise something that is a matter of integrity policy, but not only on the paper. This should be one of the main policies of our Ministry, as well as of other institutions within the security sector. This proactive approach is important in order to eliminate all potential risks for corruption’’, said Injac.

Public procurement and the whole area of finance, as she pointed out, require absolutely clear, consolidated and targeted activity within each institution, that must create preconditions to avoid any potential risk which can disturb integrity of any individual or institution through that process.

”Our attention is to improve all procedures in order to simply create conditions to understand the degree and form of transparency that must exist, but also to harmonise what is confidentiality and the need for the public to know’’ , said Injac.

As she said, the harmonisation of legal regulations with EU regulations is forthcoming, but also harmonisation with positive practices in the procurement area of other NATO members.

”A completely new reform is coming, while the best solutions will be kept’’, said Injac.

Ana Đurnić, Public Policy Researcher at the Institute Alternative, said that the main problems at the security procurement area are lack of control, strategic procurement planning and lack of reporting.

”We believe that the future work of the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Finance and the Government of Montenegro should start from the changes of the Regulation on Procurement in the Security Sector. On that level, we believe that it is possible to improve this system without too much work and too demanding reforms. We believe that the improvement of the reporting and planning system should be in focus and that should be clearly defined which are the levels and procurement in the security sector that can be accessed to the public in terms of data availability. Also, it should be defined which are the ones that can be used to reach a certain level of external oversight institutions and which are the ones that can be accessed only by those institutions that have access to confidential data’’, stated Đurnić.

She added that according to the findings of Transparency International, Montenegro is classified in the group of countries with an increased risk of corruption in the area of security procurement spending, bearing in mind the complete absence of external oversight of these procurement.

The research that was conducted, as she said, covered the period from 2018 to 2020.

‘’The last time we did a similar analysis was in 2018 and we wanted to see what happened in the meantime. Apart from legal regulations, very little has changed in practice, we can say nothing. We have a new Law on Public Procurement and a new Regulation and they have contributed in terms of harmonisation with European Union directives and in the terms of the fact that is clearer what is procurement in the security and defence sector. We are satisfied because the Law has crystallised the types of procurement in the security sector and the level of transparency that can be provided for them, but we are extremely dissatisfied that the planning and reporting system on these procurement has not been improved in any way” , said Đurnić.

Jelena Jovetić, General Director of the Directorate for Public Procurement Policy in the Ministry of Finance, has pointed out that the ministry was previously committed to regulatory reforms in public procurement and that the result was achieved, which the European Commission marked as one of the most stable systems in Western Europe.

‘’In the previous six months, we paid special attention to transparency, not only in the security and defence sector, but also in all other procurement in that part. As far as the Ministry of Finance is concerned, I can say that in terms of transparency, we have an enviable level even comparing to the member states of the European Union”, said Jovetić.

It is very important that now we have a clear separation between what is procurement, what is public and what is sensitive procurement, which segments of procurement, in what way and in accordance with which regulations can be declared as confidential.

Slađana Miletić, the representative of the Direction for Procurement and Contracting in the Ministry of Defence, said that the new Law came into force in July, and in August the Contracting Authority’s Internal Act, Rulebook on special public procurement in the security and defence sector was adopted. She added that this Act is available on the website of the Ministry of Defence.

‘’This document covers the procurement procedure based on all three points that deal with special public procurement in the security and defence sector”, said Miletić.

It is very important, as she believes, that for special public procurement in the security and defence sector there is a procedural procedure in the system, documented and justified reasons for choosing such a method of procurement that allows procurement without provisions of the Law, but in accordance with by-laws.

During the discussion, the deputy in the Parliament of Montenegro Zdenka Popović, said that it is in interest of all citizens to know how their money is spent when it comes to confidential procurement.

‘’Non-transparency allows abuse. Huge amount of money are spent on public procurement procedures. If we know that 450 to 500 million euros are spent per year, then we have to ask ourselves whether the principle of transparency and the principle of competitiveness are respected’’, said Popović.

 

Panel discussion was organised by the Institute Alternative within the project ‘’For the better use of public money’’. The project is financially supported by the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The opinions and views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the Embassy.

Posted on

Procurement in the Security and Defence Sector: New “Game Rules”, Same Issues

Institute Alternative (IA) is organising the public discussion “Procurement in the security and defence sector: New “game rules”, same issues”, that will be held on February 3rd, starting at 10am, hotel Hilton (Princess Jelena Hall),

During the panel discussion we will present a policy brief ‘’Procurement in the security and defence sector; New ‘game rules’’, same issues’’, as an overview of developments in this area in the past two years, for how long it has been since we published our analysis “Confidential Procurement in Montenegro: Far from Public’s Control’’.

The analysis is in the draft stage and its key findings will be represented at the public discussion. We organise it as a forum for discussion in regard to this topic, but also as a possibility to hear suggestions of key policy makers in the sector of public procurement, defence and security in regard to its content. Taking into u account all of the participants’ and discussants’ comments, we will finalise and publish the analysis after the event.

Given the current epidemiological conditions and the recommended measures to combat the Covid 19 virus epidemic, we are organising this event in the so-called hybrid format. Participants will be able to follow the panel discussion from the Princess Jelena Hall, but also through the Zoom application.

Link for joining panel discussion through Zoom 

Agenda, Security and Defence Procurement- New “game rules”, same issues

Public discussion is organised within the project ‘’For the better use of public money’’. The project is financially supported by the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

Posted on

EU Enlargement – a Moving Target that is Moving Farther and Farther Away

In 2020, none of the six countries of the Western Balkans has made progress in the process of European integration. It is true that they could have done more, but this still begs the question of whether the process itself “is working” if no one is making progress, and many countries have not been making progress for years, decades even. Bad moves on both sides have led to mutual mistrust, which is reflected in reforms.

I remember how negatively Jean-Claude Juncker’s statement resounded, when, in 2014, he was elected President of the European Commission and said that there would be no enlargement of the European Union until 2020. Reactions from all sides were so harsh that he later tried to tone down that statement. Nonetheless, here we are in 2021 and enlargement is nowhere in sight.

German presidency did not live up to expectations

The German presidency of the European Union, despite its best intentions and efforts, failed to provide the expected impetus to the accession of Southeast Europe to the European Union, instead, it only managed to save those relations from serious collapse. That fact alone speaks volumes about how many problems there are below the surface and how much resistance there is in the Member States to the idea of ​​further enlargement. Many actors in the Union do not believe that the Balkans will ever be transformed into serious countries based on the principle of rule of law. They doubt us and we doubt them, in that they will ever “let us in”. In such an environment, it is difficult to sustain Euro-enthusiasm. Yet, it is still the best path for us, of all plausible paths.

We can say for the European Commission and the European Parliament that they sincerely believe in the European dream of unity, solidarity and a united Europe and that they are actively working to make the Western Balkans part of the Union, where it belongs. However, the history of these relations shows that these institutions do not have enough strength to keep the promises they made, because EU Member States are holding the decisions in their hands. It wasn’t only North Macedonia and Albania that faced unfair decisions, but also Kosovo, in relation to its visa liberalisation, and Bosnia and Herzegovina, which still isn’t even granted candidate status. Montenegro and Serbia have been in a standstill for years.

It is no secret that France, Denmark, the Netherlands, Spain, and at least two or three other Member States are restrained on this topic and are counting on each other to slow down the process and make it more difficult. The height of the stalemate is evident in the fact that at the end of 2020, the Conclusions on the Enlargement/Stabilisation and Association Process were not adopted. The conclusions were blocked at the Council of Ministers, although there is nothing special in them and they do not contain any legal obligation – neither for the EU nor for the Western Balkans, but rather have a motivational character and loosely maintain the connection between the Union and us.

New obstructions for Macedonia and Albania

Although our region is accustomed to inconsistencies in the implementation of the Enlargement Strategy, the news of North Macedonia’s latest blockade due to a bilateral dispute with Bulgaria has injected a new dose of hopelessness into EU-Western Balkans relations. Germany in all of its strength failed to “thaw” Bulgaria’s position, and this is very reminiscent of the stubbornness of Greece, which kept North Macedonia under blockade for a decade. These decisions are full of senselessness, irrationality, mostly because the start of negotiations does not really have much significance at all. Montenegro was given a negotiating framework eight years ago and there are no guarantees that it will ever complete the negotiations. The negotiating framework is just a formality, the first step on a long journey we need to take, a journey with no end in sight. In this regard, it is expected that the new Negotiation Methodology will help make the process more substantial and political and not just technocratic, as it has been, for the most part, so far. However, one year after its adoption, it has not been elaborated in detail nor has its implementation begun.

The essence of the blockade of North Macedonia is that each member state can at any time “invent” a new criterion, one that is not relevant to the nature of the negotiations, which should be related to the European acquis, good governance, rule of law, human rights, the quality of democracy. This introduces uncertainty, unpredictability into the process and undermines trust. Blocking an aspirant state on the basis of ad hoc issues, such as bilateral relations and different interpretations of history, culture, identity, has absolutely no place in the “policy of conditioning”. Unless there is an intention for the negotiations to lead nowhere.

Lots of “sticks”, not enough “carrots”

“Deviations” from the planned enlargement policy and established methodology happen continuously, and that fact is quite depressing and it demotivates those who are working on transforming the Western Balkans into a developed, progressive environment. Why? The accession process is difficult and requires our countries to change, to improve, to give up their problematic practices, to restrict absolute power of authoritarian leaders, and in doing so, they actually rightly doubt that they will be justly rewarded for it. The Western Balkans are negotiating according to the strictest criteria so far, compared to all countries that have become members, while some of them have not adopted all the standards themselves.

The EU should have an understanding for this reality and, in addition to the “sticks” with which it punishes countries when they do not fulfill their tasks, there should also be more “carrots” with which they will reward countries when they actually achieve results.

Someone from the EU usually retorts to this argument by saying “but you need to implement reforms for your own sake”. Yes, absolutely. However, anyone who says that does not understand how seductive power is in it itself, as a phenomenon, and how difficult it is to voluntarily give up such a great supremacy that the Balkan rulers have in their hands. Any successful reform is essentially a conscious renunciation, a reduction in the concentration of power, the introduction of rules, predictability, control, balance, the dispersion of force and power.

Of course, we the people are the ones most concerned by reforms, but it is also a fact that the pressure and “demand” for reforms in our countries is low, insufficient, and the political parties of any government and any party wing are fine with the gaps through which they can pursue their interests, parallel to European values. Clientelism and informal practices are a way of life in the Western Balkans. Progressive forces that are pushing forward are outnumbered everywhere. They are rare individuals and small groups you see in the media, civil society, political party fragments and informal citizens’ associations, and the EU needs to recognise this and help such forces by keeping their word. The main reforms are as arduous as fulfilling those New Year’s resolutions we nicely planned, but then somehow in the New Year everything ends up the same as before.

Eternal negotiations

Negotiations are long and ineffective. This is made clear by the fact that years go by and there is no progress. They knew that in the EU when they started working on the new Methodology. It is wrong, even meaningless of some EU Member States to assume that the longer the negotiations, the more ready the country will be once it joins. There is a very simple reason for this, and that is that countries for which membership is far in the future do not put in their maximum efforts to complete their tasks now. Back in 2014, when Juncker said that there would be no enlargement, Montenegro immediately reduced its efforts and that reflected on the progress of the negotiations. Why do something in 2015, when there will be no rewards for a long time to come? It is more important to win the 2016 elections, using state resources illegally.

Criteria for progress are subject to politisation and it goes two ways – one is for the state to move forward with the process because of a political decision to move forward, although objectively it did not truly deserve it, and the other is not to move forward, also for political reasons, although it has made very important steps forward. Both are bad, for the process itself and for trust.

While all this is happening and we are constantly receiving unfavourable signals for the region, the new Montenegrin authorities are saying that there is a real chance that Montenegro will complete the negotiations by 2025 i.e., fulfill all obligations by 2023. It is true that Montenegro is receiving assurances from Brussels that, if it fulfills its tasks, it may become part of the EU. However, such assurances were also given to North Macedonia and Albania. Such assurances have been given to Kosovo regarding visa liberalisation. Nevertheless, it seems that something serious and fundamental needs to be improved in the Union’s relationship with the Western Balkans so that we can really hope for the desired enlargement.

Author: Dina Bajramspahić, Public Policy Researcher at Institute Alternative (IA)

This blog is published as part of the regional blogging initiative “Tales from the Region”, led by Res Publica and the Institute of Communication Studies, in partnership with Macropolis (Greece), IDM (Albania), Lupiga (Croatia), Sbunker (Kosovo), Ne Davimo Beograd (Serbia), Analiziraj (Bosnia and Herzegovina), PcNen (Montenegro), SEGA (Bulgaria) and HAD (Slovenia).

Posted on

Preparation of Government’s Work Programme for 2021 should be opened for citizens’ proposals

Institute Alternative has been recommending for years that Government’s Work Programme, as the most important act for determining the priorities of the Government’s work, should be opened for public’s suggestions.

This recommendation is now actualised in a letter to the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister of the Government of Montenegro, Mr. Zdravko Krivokapić and Dritan Abazović.

We consider that citizens have the right to give reasoned ideas, proposals and suggestions for Government’s Work Programme in the current year.

We believe that through public call and appropriate deadline for giving suggestions, with additional effort of competent ministries and conversations with proponent, it can upgrade the quality of Government’s Work Programme.

We expect that ministries in the future, unlike previous practice, in accordance with established legal obligations, will publish work programmes and list of their activities that will be at public consultations during the year.

The first prerequisite for consulting the public is planning and informing the public on priorities and obligations, so that expert public and citizens could prepare in time and give quality contribution in making policies.

The Government and ministries should open a dialogue before making important decisions, so that those decisions have bigger legitimacy and public trust. It is necessary to improve medium and long-term planning and coordination of public policies because that is prerequisite for successful solution of complex problems.

It is very important for citizen participation in public policy development that public administration proactively publishes policy briefs, opinions on which they based their plans and decisions, so that everyone who wants can have information for equal participation in public consultations. It is important that with simple language, as less bureaucratic as possible, administration makes an effort to explain complex concepts so that as many citizens as possible are involved and decisions fit the best they can to the specific needs of those concerned.

Stevo Muk
President of Managing Board at Institute Alternative

Posted on

Political Appointments of Top Managers Go Against Professionalisation Promises

The announcements of distribution of top and senior civil service positions  are opposite to the previously declared opening of the administration, encouragement of the best candidates to get the jobs and the overall professionalisation of state administration.

Institute Alternative has previously pointed out that bidding by names and party affiliation when filling managerial positions, especially those that are subject to public competition, is not in the spirit of professionalisation or attracting the best staff.

According to the Law on Civil Servants and State Employees, the positions of head of bodies and senior management, for example, directors of administrations and their assistants, are filled based on a public competition, in accordance with the previously prescribed procedure which implies the right of all eligible candidates to apply for those positions and to be evaluated only on the basis of their managerial competencies and other qualifications required.

The leaked information sends the message that these and other positions of the public sector are predetermined and agreed in relation to a ‘’party quotas’’. This was the earlier practice of  the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) and coalition partners. For years, we have witnessed the bad consequences of such an approach and the tendency to subordinate party interests to the public interest.

The excuse that positions in a five-year or four-year mandate are not attractive enough for professional staff is not convincing, especially because manager in state bodies has the right to be reassigned to other positions after the expiration of the mandate. There are also legal mechanisms to provide legal security and conditions that will not discourage highly qualified candidates from applying to competitions.

Political parties should improve those conditions and legal security of leadership positions, to allow necessary expertise and continuity of civil service regardless of political change, and to prevent situations with each shift of power, the new government will face ‘’political opposition’’ at the formally professional positions. Otherwise, if information on the political distribution of posts are true, we remain in a vicious circle of party distributions. In addition, as we pointed out in our analysis ‘’Towards Merit-based Administration, Not a Party-measured One’’, this creates an alibi for each new government to make appointments on a similar matrix under the pretext that the one before did the same.

Milena Muk

Institute Alternative