Throughout 2010 MANS was observing plenary and sessions of all Committees of the Parliament of Montenegro, collecting and publishing data on Members of the Parliament (MPs) activities and Parliament’s performances.
During 2010, the Parliament had 76 days of plenary sessions while 12 Parliament’s committees held total of 238 meetings. MANS’ Parliament Team directly observed each of those sessions and collected information on activities of each MP, level of work of the Parliament and its committees, use of the Parliament’s oversight mechanisms and other control functions.
In March 2010 MANS has published Annual Report on the work of the new Parliament’s Assembly in 20099.
Following media campaign conducted by MANS, new Secretary General of the Parliament decided to increase transparency of work of that institution, and started developing new internet portal. All our major remarks were accepted by the Parliament and the new portal is in place.
We have developed Report on Parliament’s Budget Realization for 2009 which contained information on all expenditures of the Parliament in 2009, public procurements, salaries and additional fees and benefits of the MPs and the Parliament’s administration.
In 2010, MANS continued to monitor Parliament budget expenditures. For that purpose, we have submitted over 370 FOI requests, obtaining almost 90% of requested information.
All information collected during 2010 were analyzed and presented in form of two watchdog reports on activities and expenditures of the Parliament10, published in February and November 2010.
In order to improve information sharing between MPs and citizens, in the reporting period MANS distributed 44 weekly newsletters on activities of the Parliament through 19 MANS e-lists with more than 3,400 members, but also to each MP. We were also informing stakeholders on laws that are in procedure in the Parliament and providing them with assistance to submit analyses, comments and proposed amendments to the MPs.
MANS developed two Comparative Analyses related to rules, procedures and experiences of five parliaments from the region11 in dealing with citizens’ initiatives and in using control functions to hold the executive accountable in relation to privatization.
We presented best practices identified in the comparative analyses at round table on public participation in Parliament’s affairs that gathered over 50 prominent participants12. Trade Unions’ leaders from the largest companies presented participants problems in almost twenty concrete cases of privatization.
We also submitted an initiative to the Deputy President of the Parliament asking for consultation process to be organized to define clear procedure for revision of citizens’ initiatives, and proposing solutions on the basis of best practices from the region. The Deputy President processed the initiative in front of relevant Parliament’s committees that are supposed to discuss it in the upcoming period.
Based on cases reported by citizens, MANS submitted 13 initiatives to the Parliament’s working bodies, and Parliament’s committees acted upon six of them.
Four initiatives referred to the case of miners that were striking in the underground mine “Biocki stan”13, and three of them were discussed by the Parliament’s committees and the General Assembly, resulting in adoption of the changes of the Law on Pension System that was main condition for workers to abort the strike. It was the first time that a Law was changed upon citizens’ initiatives. Moreover, the Parliament’s Commission for Oversight of Privatization for the first time held session outside of the Parliament, since members of the Commission went down to the mine and spoke directly with miners that were in strike.
After this case, the Commission acquired practice to have additional sessions outside Parliament, in order to gather more information, to involve citizens in the decision making and in order to bring more informed decisions.
One MANS initiative was related to privatization of the company “Ironworks – Niksic” where Commission for Oversight of Privatization scheduled special session and discussed conditions in that company. This prevented more radical strikes in that company and contributed to more active involvement of the Supreme State Prosecutor in investigating this case.
Another initiative was submitted in July 2010 to the Defense and Security Committee to review whether National Security Agency is conducting surveillance over NGOs, journalists and political leaders. The Committee ordered the Agency to prepare special report upon our initiative in September 2010. The report was submitted to the Parliament, but was never reviewed by the Committee.
Next initiative, related to changes of the FOI Law, was submitted to two committees, one refused to invite us, but the other committee invited us and majority of MPs supported our amendments. Following that, the government redrew the law proposal.
Three initiatives were sent to Parliament’s committees on Security and Defense; Human Rights and Freedoms and Agriculture, Ecology, Tourism and Spatial Planning in December, regarding destruction of almost two tons of weapons and ammunition14.
Other initiative was submitted to the Parliament’s Committee on Economy Finance and Budget in December 2010, regarding finances of the National Television.
Last initiative we submitted to the Committee on Economy, Finance and Budget, also in December, and provided MPs with proposals for amendments to the Law on Accountancy and Audit, developed together with the Montenegrin Institute for Accountancy and Audit.
For each submitted initiative we created public pressure through media campaign, necessary for the initiatives to be reviewed by relevant committees. In 2010 relevant Parliament’s Committees invited us to participate at seven sessions and provide them with further information related to submitted initiatives.
In this way, on the basis of concrete cases, we were able to show how the Parliament could act upon citizens’ requests as well as develop practice for future civic initiatives to build on.
