| MONTENEGRO | |
|
2005 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONOther laws are still only in preparation, such as the draft law on free access to public information, which was backed by the NGO sector but is currently in the parliamentary procedure.[1] |
| COUNCIL OF EUROPE Republic of Montenegro: to adopt, following Council of Europe experts’ recommendations, the Law on Free Access to Information and subsequently ensure its effective implementation.[2]
As regards Montenegro, NGOs which participated in the drafting of the Law on Free Access to Information indicated that, after adoption of the final draft by the working group, in line with Council of Europe experts’ recommendations, the draft was significantly changed by the Ministry of Culture and Media. The competent authorities are called to adopt legislation in line with Council of Europe standards and experts’ recommendations. [3] According to several interlocutors, a lot of time has been lost during the past year. Once the draft is adopted, the authorities should focus on the implementation of this important piece of legislation. [4] Republic of Montenegro: to adopt, following CoE experts’ recommendations, the Law on Free Access to Information and subsequently ensure its effective implementation.[5] In Montenegro, the adoption of a Law on Free Access to Information, following a long process of approval by the Government, is also expected.[6] In Montenegro, the Government approved the draft Law on Free Access to Information on 30 June, following the organisation of a round-table with CoE experts in early June.[7] Republic of Montenegro: to adopt, following CoE experts’ recommendations, the Law on Free Access to Information and subsequently ensure its effective implementation. [8] The Draft Law on Free Access to Information has been put into the procedure before the Parliament of the Republic Montenegro.[9] Legislation on free access to information has an instrumental role in the fight against corruption. In Montenegro, the adoption of long-awaited legislation on this subject-matter in November 2005 represents a positive development. Its implementation represents a challenge for the whole society, and should be closely observed in the forthcoming year.[10] |
|
|
2006 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONThe Law on free access to public information has been adopted.[11] |
| GRECOConsequently, the GET recommends that a Law on Free Access to Information be adopted as soon as possible and that training for civil servants on the public’s rights under the Law be provided. Moreover, appropriate information on the Law should be made available to the public at large.[12] | |
|
2007 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONNGO representatives have encountered difficulties, in particular as regards access to information.[13] |
|
2008 |
COUNCIL OF EUROPE The law on Access to Public Information could be an important tool for fighting corruption by promoting transparency and public accountability. It is, however, only weakly enforced by the courts, in particular in relation to privatisations. NGOs and civil society face a long, difficult and expensive process to gain access to the information. Several interlocutors estimated that there could potentially be a useful role to play of an independent Commissioner on access to public information. If a serious and independent form of transparent public oversight were in place it would be much less likely that the kind of abuses which give rise to suspicions of corruption could take place.[14] |
| SERBIA | |
|
2005 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONThe Government is still reluctant to fully implement the law on free access to information. This continues to undermine transparency in public policies. [15]
The Serbian law on free access to public information is still not being fully implemented. The Office of the Commissioner for public information became operational only in June 2005; the Agent also reports problems concerning the administration’s understanding of the law and its continuing ignorance and frequent reluctance to comply.[16] The law on free access to information was adopted, but it is still not being fully implemented.[17] |
| COUNCIL OF EUROPE Republic of Serbia: to ensure, among other laws, the appropriate application of the Law on Free Access to Public Information.[18]
As concerns freedom of access to information, adoption of legislation in Montenegro and implementation of the existing legislation in Serbia is strongly recommended. In Serbia, a Commissioner for free access to information was appointed by the Parliament on 22 December 2004. The Commissioner, although he started receiving complaints, indicated a lack of basic work conditions, as well as a lack of readiness of state institutions to implement the Law. In addition, Transparency Serbia assessed the implementation of the Law so far as unsuccessful, with only one sixth of the answers to information requests received within in an appropriate time-frame. Sufficient resources should be provided by the authorities in order to secure implementation of the Law.[19] As regards the implementation of the Law on free access to information in Serbia, several obstacles still exist. Financial and material questions related to the establishment of the Commissioner for public information office are still not completely solved. Several initiatives have been taken in order to ensure the public dissemination of information on the content of the legislation and several manuals have been published.[20] Republic of Serbia: to ensure the appropriate implementation of the Law on Free Access to Public Information.[21] As regards the implementation of the Law on free access to information in Serbia, several obstacles still exist. However, financial and material conditions related to the establishment of the Commissioner for Public Information Office have improved. The civil society is active in improving the public perception on this new institution. Initiatives from a coalition of NGOs include awareness-raising activities, publication of a guidebook and regular monitoring of the implementation of the Law. In June, a research carried out by Transparency Serbia concluded that around 60 per cent of the institutions on local and republic level still do not implement the Law on Free Access to Information. [22] Republic of Serbia: to ensure the appropriate implementation of the Law on Free Access to Public Information.[23] The adoption of the Law on Free Access to Public information, on 5 November 2004, provided the necessary conditions for the work of the Commissioner for public information office. The Manual on exercising the rights, provided in the Law, has been worked out and the preparation of the relevant regulations has been underway.[24] Legislation on free access to information has an instrumental role in the fight against corruption. [25] In Serbia, implementation of the legislation adopted in November 2004 started during the summer 2005.[26] |
|
|
2006 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONConcerning free access to information of public interest, the commissioner for public information has been very active. However, lack of enforcement remains a problem. In several cases, the authorities have not complied with the commissioner’s requests.[27] |
| COUNCIL OF EUROPE The Law on the Implementation of the Constitution was adopted on 10 November 2006 providing for, inter alia: The new Parliament to amend/adjust laws in line with the new Constitution during their first sitting after the formation of the Government on: Ombudsman (and elect the person), Free access to public information (and elect the body in charge).[28]
The Secretariat found/got a more positive assessment by national and international interlocutors of the increased transparency of the work of the NA [29]– notably due to the implementation of the law on free access to information of public importance and the work of the Commissioner for public information.[30] |
|
| GRECOA Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance was adopted in November 2004. [31]
A Commissioner for Information of Public Importance was appointed in December 2004 by the parliament.[32] In particular, the Commissioner for Free Access to Public Information said that “a crucial obstacle for the implementation of the Law is the lack of knowledge” and that “neither the citizens nor the media are sufficiently familiar with the new rights and the way in which they are exercised”. Therefore, the GET recommends to provide training to civil servants on the public’s rights under the Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance and give appropriate information on the Law to the public at large.[33] |
|
|
2007 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONProvisions from the Constitutional Law concerning the Ombudsman and the Commissioner for free access to public information have already been implemented.[34]
Concerning free access to information of public interest, the Commissioner for Public Information was re-appointed. However, the free access to information has to be further improved. Limited resources and the lack of enforcement powers have restricted the work of the Commissioner for Public Information. In several instances the government has not sufficiently acted on the Commissioner’s recommendations.[35] |
| COUNCIL OF EUROPE The Commissioner for Information of Public Importance has also been playing an increasingly important role, his pressure, for example, was instrumental in convincing the government to publish the controversial Concession Contract for Horgos-Pozega Highway Route. More needs to be done to improve the effective independence and the public’s confidence in the independence of these bodies.[36]
The law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance was amended in June 2007 and the Commissioner was appointed.[37] |
|
| BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA | |
|
2005 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONSeparate laws on free access to information are in force at the various levels of government. These laws also deal with access to government-held information. Information is accessible to the citizens following a written request but the public tends not to exercise this right. [38] |
|
2006 |
GRECOSeparate Laws on Free Access to Information have been adopted since 2000 at State and Entity levels; their contents appear to be largely harmonised.[39]
Although steps have been taken to improve public awareness of the law, e.g. through the establishment of specialised NGOs carrying out research on implementation (Mediacentar) and providing support with respect to information requests (Centre for Free Access to Information), the number of citizens’ requests for information still remains very limited.[40] In the light of the above, the GET recommends to (i) pursue effective implementation of the legal provisions on access to public information; (ii) provide the possibility to effectively challenge denials of access to information; (iii) hold civil servants accountable for failure to comply with the law; and (iv) properly monitor the enforcement of the afore-mentioned measures.[41] Further improvements are recommended with respect, for example, to effective implementation of access to information legislation, training on ethics, review of financial declarations, procedures for reporting suspicions of corruption and protection of civil servants reporting in good faith.[42] |
| kosovo | |
|
2005 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONHowever the Law on Access to Information still has to be implemented.[43] |
|
2007 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONThe law on access to documents is being implemented satisfactorily at local level.[44]
The law on copyright and the law on access to official documents have so far not been fully implemented.[45] |
| ALBANIA | |
|
2007 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONImprovements in the legal framework to allow free access to public information are needed.[46] |
| CROATIA | |
|
2005 |
GRECOIt has also recently enacted the Law on the Right of Access to Information and the Regulations on the Structure, Content and Manner of Keeping the Official Register on Information Requests which address the rights of natural and legal persons to request access to information. The aforementioned law provides that public authorities actively disclose certain types of information without waiting for a request and that they inform the public about agendas, time and venue of certain meetings, indicating whether those meetings are open to the public and the procedures to be followed in case of attendance (Article 22, Law on the Right of Access to Information).[47]
While the law contains the basic provisions that are important to providing access to government information and thus transparency of government, the law’s actual implementation and application is critical in an effective fight against corruption and to general good governance. The GET recommends that the effectiveness of the provisions of the Law on the Right of Access to Information and its implementation be assessed and that training on the provisions of the law be provided to all information officers and to public officials who manage programmes that are subject to significant requests for information.[48] Recognising that the existence of a transparent and accessible register of legal persons is an essential preventive measure against the use of legal persons to shield corruption offences, the GET recommends to take appropriate measures to ensure that the public’s right of access to information on legal persons contained in commercial registers can be exercised in an effective manner.[49] |
|
2006 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONClarifications on the Right of Access to Information Law are also needed. [50] |
|
2007 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONThere remain contradictions between the Law on Access to Information and other acts relating to secrecy in public administration, where there is a need for increased transparency.[51] |
| GRECOHowever, GRECO would have appreciate more concrete information regarding the effectiveness of the relevant legislation in order to be able to form a clear view on how the right in free access to information is being implemented in practice and to confirm that the concern expressed in the Second Round Evaluation Report, i.e. that denials of requests for information were more frequent than desirable is no longer valid.[52]
Consequently, the authorities are encouraged ton step up their efforts and to provide further training activities for both information officers and public officials who manage programmes that are subject to significant request for information. [53] |
|
| MACEDONIA | |
|
2005 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONTransparency of the administration would be strengthened if a proper legal framework were adopted on public access to documents. A law is under consideration in Parliament.[54] |
| GRECONew legislation was, however, underway and the GET was made aware of the draft Law on Free Access to Information, covering state as well as local administration which was being drafted by the Government (second stage).[55]
Moreover, the draft law provides for the establishment of an independent body (“State Commission“) as a complaints body in cases where information requests by citizens are rejected.[56] Transparency of public administration is yet another area of particular concern. As pointed out in several of GRECO’s evaluation reports, access to public information is an important factor in creating a modern administration and is considered crucial for the prevention as well as the detection of corruption.[57] The GET recommends to urgently adopt basic legislation on access to public information and to develop modern principles and routines for “e-governance”. [58] |
|
|
2006 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONSteps were taken to improve transparency in public decisions and in the management of state assets. In particular the Law on Free Access to Public Information was adopted in February and entered into force in September. [59]
An independent commission was set up in June to oversee its implementation. The government also promoted several web-portals to facilitate access to administrative bodies.[60] There was some progress in increasing the transparency of public activities, notably with the adoption in February of the Law on Free Access to Public Information and the measures taken in the public procurement area.[61] |
|
2007 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONFurther steps have been taken to implement the law on freedom of information.[62]
The law on access to information is not fully implemented as many public bodies which hold information of public interest are not fully prepared or are unwilling to facilitate access to it. In addition, the administrative capacity of the commission for the protection of the right to free access to public information remains weak. Insufficient training and information have been provided both to the holders of the information and to the public.[63] More effective implementation of the preventive measures provided by the anti-corruption legal framework, including the law on general administrative procedures and the law on free access to public information, would narrow the opportunities for corruption.[64] |
| GRECOThe authorities report that the law on Free Access to Information was adopted by Parliament on 25 January 2006 and came into force in September 2006. The law regulates the terms and the procedure for exercising the right to free access to public information provided by governmental and other bodies, including municipal administrations. Its implementation is supervised by the Commission for the Protection of the right to Free Access to Public Information whose president and other members are appointed by and responsible to Parliament.[65] | |
| BULGARIA | |
|
2004 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONThe 2003 report contains recommendations to improve the work organisation of the public administration, the administrative capacity for the implementation of the acquis, and access to public information. It also deals with the introduction of information technologies and with anticorruption measures.[66] |
| GRECOThirdly, transparency of information in respect of the public is provided for by the Law on the Restriction of the Administrative Regulation and Administrative Control over the Economic Activity providing access to information concerning current licence holders, registration regimes, and of various relevant regulations. As yet there is no regime for covering the acts of legal persons committed via natural persons, although the authorities have reported that this will come into force in 2004.[67] | |
|
2005 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONOpenness and transparency of public service, notably as regards access to public information, are covered by the Law on Access to Public Information, as amended in 2003. Although there has been an increase in the number of decisions issued by the Bulgarian administration on the basis of this law, and its acceptance has increased, the impact of the law remains limited. [68] |
| GRECOThe Law on Access to Public Information (hereinafter LAPI) ensures the right of access to information.[69] | |
| ROMANIA | |
|
2004 |
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONIn its 2003 Regular Report, the Commission found that: “Laws on the freedom of information and transparency in the legislative process are also positive developments but have only been partially implemented.”[70]
Awareness of the public and the administration has increased as concerns the rights and obligation provided by the Law on access to information and the Law on transparency of the decision-making process- the so-called “sunshine law”. However, implementation remains uneven, in particular at the level of local administration.[71] The Law on transparency of the decision-making process which provides for the early publication of draft legislation in order to allow for consultation and comments from stakeholders will significantly increase transparency when fully implemented.[72] The Romanian legislation on the free access to public information, adopted in 2001 proves to be an important mechanism promoting public accountability. However, in the absence of an institution specifically responsible for ensuring the effective implementation of this law, its application remains uneven.[73] The laws on the freedom of information and transparency in the legislative process should still be fully implemented. [74] The laws on the freedom of information and transparency in the legislative process should still be fully implemented.[75] |
|
2005 |
GRECOThe right of every natural person and legal entity to information is provided for by the Constitution (Article 31) and Law No. 544/2001 on freedom of access to information of public interest. The right to information may be implemented ex officio (in the cases specified in Article 5 of the Law) or else on request, whereby the administration must verify and process requests within 10 to 30 days maximum (24 hours for the media). Law No. 544/2001 also comprise special provisions on access to information by the media.[76]
The need to take account of the fight against corruption and to prevent abuses in administrative decision-making processes led to the adoption of Law No. 52/2003 on decision-making transparency in the public administration.[77] The GET nevertheless considers that most cases of lack of transparency are due to the absence of sufficiently detailed and effective legislation, appropriate training for public officials on the existing rules on administrative transparency, and an appropriate mechanism for supervising and guaranteeing access to information and for giving independent opinions on whether or not a document can be communicated at the request of a citizen who has been denied access thereto.[78] In view of the foregoing, the GET recommends to review, as necessary, the legislation unduly restricting the right of individuals to have access to official documents and to provide appropriate training to public officials on the implementation of the rules on freedom of information. [79] In the light of the foregoing, the GET observes that the Romanian authorities should review the provisions on civil servants’ duty to be discreet.[80] |
[1] European Commission, Serbia and Montenegro 2005 Progress Report {COM (2005) 561 final}, Brussels, 9 November 2005 SEC (2005) 1428, Political situation Democracy and the rule of law, Anti-corruption policy, p.17
[2] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2005)5 final, Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Seventh report (December 2004 – February 2005),14 March 2005, Main conclusions and recommendations, p.4
[3] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2005)5 final, Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Seventh report (December 2004 – February 2005),14 March 2005, Freedom of media, p.16
[4] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2005)13 , Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Eighth report (March 2005 – June 2005),13 July 2005, Human rights, Freedom of the media, Free access to information, p. 17
[5] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2005)13 , Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Eighth report (March 2005 – June 2005),13 July 2005, Main conclusions and recommendations, p. 24
[6] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2005)16 final, Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Ninth report (July 2005 – September 2005, 11 October 2005,Summary, p. 1
[7] Council of Europe, Information Documents, SG/Inf(2005)16 final, Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Ninth report (July 2005 – September 2005, 11 October 2005, Human rights, Freedom of the media, Free access to information, p. 13
[8] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2005)16 final, Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Ninth report (July 2005 – September 2005, 11 October 2005, Main conclusions and recommendations, p. 18
[9]Council of Europe, Information Documents, SG/Inf(2005)16 Addendum, Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with commitments and obligations and implementation of post-accession co-operation programme, Addendum to the Ninth Quarterly Report, (July 2005 – September 2005), Additional information provided by the authorities of Serbia and Montenegro, p.7
[10] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2006)01, Serbia and Montenegro:Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Tenth report (October 2005 – January 2006) 19 January 2006, Rule of law, Fight against corruption and organised crime , p.17
[11] Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Document Montenegro 2006 Progress Report EN {COM (2006) 649 final}, Brussels, 08.11.2006 SEC (2006) 1388, Political situation, Democracy and the rule of law, Anti-corruption policy, p. 11
[12] Group of States against corruption, Joint First and Second Evaluation Rounds, Evaluation Report on the Republic of Montenegro, Adopted by GRECO at its 30 th Plenary Meeting Strasbourg, 9-13 October 2006, Public administration and corruption, Analysis, p. 25
[13] Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Document Montenegro 2007 Progress Report {COM(2007) 663 final}, Brussels, 6.11.2007 SEC(2007) 1434, Political situation, Democracy and the rule of law, Anti-corruption policy , p. 12
[14] Council of Europe, SG/Inf (2008) 9 final Montenegro: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Secretariat Monitoring Report (from August 2007 through April 2008), 11 June 2008, Rule of Law, Fight against corruption and organised crime, p.10
[15] European Commission, Serbia and Montenegro 2005 Progress Report {COM (2005) 561 final}, Brussels, 9 November 2005 SEC (2005) 1428, Political situation, Democracy and the Rule of Law, Anti-corruption policy, p. 17
[16] Commission, Serbia and Montenegro 2005 Progress Report {COM (2005) 561 final}, Brussels, 9 November 2005 SEC (2005) 1428, Political situation, Human rights and the protection of minorities, Civil and political rights, p.19
[17] European Commission, Serbia and Montenegro 2005 Progress Report {COM (2005) 561 final}, Brussels, 9 November 2005 SEC (2005) 1428, European partnership: Overall assessment, Political situation, p. 56
[18] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2005)5 final, Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Seventh report (December 2004 – February 2005),14 March 2005, Introduction, Main conclusions and recommendations, p.4
[19] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2005)5 final, Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Seventh report (December 2004 – February 2005),14 March 2005, Human rights, Freedom of the media, p.16
[20] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2005)13 , Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Eighth report (March 2005 – June 2005), 13 July 2005, Human Rights, Freedom of the media, Free access to information, p.17
[21] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2005)13 , Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Eighth report (March 2005 – June 2005), 13 July 2005, Main conclusions and recommendations, p.22
[22] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2005)16 final, Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Ninth report (July 2005 – September 2005, 11 October 2005, Human Rights, Freedom of the media, Free access to information, p.13
[23] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2005)16 final, Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Ninth report (July 2005 – September 2005, 11 October 2005, Main conclusions and recommendations, p.17
[24] Council of Europe, Information Documents, SG/Inf(2005)16 Addendum, Serbia and Montenegro: Compliance with commitments and obligations and implementation of post-accession co-operation programme, Addendum to the Ninth Quarterly Report, (July 2005 – September 2005), Additional information provided by the authorities of Serbia and Montenegro, p.5
[25] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2006)01, Serbia and Montenegro:Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, Tenth report (October 2005 – January 2006) 19 January 2006, Rule of law, Fight against corruption and organised crime, p.17
[26] Ibid, p.17
[27] Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Document, Serbia 2006 Progress Report, {COM(2006) 649 final}, Brussels, 8.11.2006 SEC(2006) 1389, Political criteria, Democracy and the rule of law, Public administration, p. 8
[28] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2006)15 final, Republic of Serbia: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme , First report (January -October 2006), 18December 2006, General context and political agenda, p.5
[29] The National Assembly
[30] Council of Europe, SG/Inf(2006)15 final, Republic of Serbia: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme , First report (January -October 2006), 18December 2006, Effective functioning of democratic institutions, p.9
[31] Group of States Against Corruption, Joint First and Second Evaluation Rounds, Evaluation Report on the Republic of Serbia, Adopted by GRECO at its 29th Plenary Meeting Strasbourg, 19-23 June 2006, Public administration and corruption, Description of the situation , Transparency, p.22
[32] Ibid, p.23
[33] Group of States Against Corruption, Joint First and Second Evaluation Rounds, Evaluation Report on the Republic of Serbia, Adopted by GRECO at its 29th Plenary Meeting Strasbourg, 19-23 June 2006, Public administration and corruption, analysis, p.27-28
[34] Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Document Serbia 2007 Progress Report, {COM(2007) 663 final}, Brussels, 6.11.2007 SEC(2007) 1435, Political criteria , Democracy and the Rule of Law, Constitution, p.6
[35] Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Document Serbia 2007 Progress Report, {COM(2007) 663 final}, Brussels, 6.11.2007 SEC(2007) 1435, Political criteria , Democracy and the Rule of Law, Public administration, p. 8-9
[36] Council of Europe, SG/Inf (2008) 3, Serbia: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, 3rd Report (July 2007 – January 2008), 16 January 2008, Recent Developments, Democracy , p.4
[37] Council of Europe, SG/Inf (2008) 3, Serbia: Compliance with obligations and commitments and implementation of the post-accession co-operation programme, 3rd Report (July 2007 – January 2008), 16 January 2008, Developments Related to Specific Accession Commitments, Domestic Legislation, p.12
[38] European Commission, Bosnia and Herzegovina 2005 Progress Report, {COM (2005) 561 final}, Brussels, 9 November 2005, SEC (2005) 1422, Political situation, Democracy and the rule of law, Public administration, p.15
[39] Group of States Against Corruption, Second Evaluation Rounds, Evaluation Report on Bosnia and Herzegovina, Adopted by GRECO at its 31 st Plenary Meeting Strasbourg, 4 – 8 December 2006, Theme II – Public administration and corruption, Description of the situation, Transparency, p.12
[40] Group of States Against Corruption, Second Evaluation Rounds, Evaluation Report on Bosnia and Herzegovina, Adopted by GRECO at its 31 st Plenary Meeting Strasbourg, 4 – 8 December 2006, Theme II – Public administration and corruption, Analysis, p.17
[41] Ibid, p.17
[42] Group of States Against Corruption, Second Evaluation Rounds, Evaluation Report on Bosnia and Herzegovina, Adopted by GRECO at its 31 st Plenary Meeting Strasbourg, 4 – 8 December 2006,Conclusion, p.26
[43] European Commission, Kosovo (under UNSCR 1244) 2005 Progress Report, {COM (2005) 561 final}, Brussels, 9 November 2005, SEC (2005) 1423, European Standards, Sectoral policies, Information society and media, p.51
[44] Commission of the European Communities Commission Staff Working Document Kosovo under UNSCR 1244 2007 Progress Report {COM(2007) 663 final, Brussels, 6.11.2007 SEC(2007) 1433, Political criteria, Democracy and the rule of law, Government, p.9
[45] Commission of the European Communities Commission Staff Working Document Kosovo under UNSCR 1244 2007 Progress Report {COM(2007) 663 final, Brussels, 6.11.2007 SEC(2007) 1433, Political criteria, Human rights and the protection of minorities, Civil and Political Rights, p.15
[46] Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Document, Albania 2007 Progress Report , {COM(2007) 663 final, Brussels, 6.11.2007, SEC(2007) 1429, Political criteria, Democracy and the rule of law, Anti-corruption policy, p. 10
[47] Group of States Against Corruption, Second Evaluation Round, Evaluation Report on Croatia, Adopted by GRECO at its 26th Plenary Meeting, Strasbourg,5 – 9 December 2005, Theme II – Public administration and corruption, Description of the situation, Transparency, p.8-9
[48] Group of States Against Corruption, Second Evaluation Round, Evaluation Report on Croatia, Adopted by GRECO at its 26th Plenary Meeting, Strasbourg,5 – 9 December 2005, Theme II – Public administration and corruption, Analysis, p.12
[49] Group of States Against Corruption, Second Evaluation Round, Evaluation Report on Croatia, Adopted by GRECO at its 26th Plenary Meeting, Strasbourg,5 – 9 December 2005, Theme III – Legal persons and corruption, Analysis, p.20
[50] Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Document Croatia 2006 Progress Report, {COM (2006) 649 final}, Brussels, 08.11.2006 SEC (2006) 1385, Ability to assume the obligations of membership, Judiciary and fundamental rights, p.51
[51] Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Document Croatia 2007 Progress Report, {COM(2007) 663 final}, Brussels, 6.11.2007 SEC(2007) 1431, Ability to assume the obligations of membership, Judiciary and fundamental rights, p.50
[52] Group of States Against Corruption, Second Evaluation Round, Compliance Report on Croatia, Adopted by GRECO at its 35th Plenary Meeting, Strasbourg, 3 – 7 December 2007, Recommendation iii., p.4
[53] Ibid, p.4
[54] Commission of the European Communities, Analytical Report for the Opinion on the application from the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia for EU membership {COM (2005) 562 final}, Brussels, 9 November 2005 SEC (2005) 1425, Political criteria, Democracy and the rule of law, The Executive, Functioning of the Executive, p.17
[55] Group of States Against Corruption, Second Evaluation Round, Evaluation Report on the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Adopted by GRECO at its 25th Plenary Meeting, Strasbourg, 10 – 14 October 2005, Theme II – Public administration and corruption, Description of the situation, Transparency, p.9
[56] Ibid, p.9
[57] Group of States Against Corruption, Second Evaluation Round, Evaluation Report on the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Adopted by GRECO at its 25th Plenary Meeting, Strasbourg, 10 – 14 October 2005, Theme II – Public administration and corruption, Analysis, p.15
[58] Ibid, p.15
[59] Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Document, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 2006 Progress Report, {COM (2006) 649 final}, Brussels, 08.11.2006 SEC (2006)1387
Political criteria, Democracy and the rule of law, Anti-corruption policy, p. 11
[60] Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Document, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 2006 Progress Report, {COM (2006) 649 final}, Brussels, 08.11.2006 SEC (2006)1387
Political criteria, Democracy and the rule of law, Public Administration, p.7
[61] Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Document, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 2006 Progress Report, {COM (2006) 649 final}, Brussels, 08.11.2006 SEC (2006)1387, Ability to assume the obligations of membership, Judiciary and fundamental rights, p.45
[62] Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Document the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 2007, Progress Report, {COM(2007) 663 final} Brussels, 6.11.2007 SEC(2007) 1432, Political criteria, Democracy and the rule of law, Public administration, p.8
[63] Ibid, p.9
[64] Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Document the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 2007, Progress Report, {COM(2007) 663 final} Brussels, 6.11.2007 SEC(2007) 1432, Political criteria, Democracy and the rule of law, Anti-corruption policy, p. 11
[65] Group of States Against Corruption, Second Evaluation Round, Compliance Report on the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Adopted by GRECO at its 34th Plenary Meeting, Strasbourg, 16 – 19 October 2007, Recommendation iv, p.4
[66] Commission of the European Communities, 2004 Regular Report on Bulgaria’s Progress Towards Accession, {COM(2004) 657 final}, Brussels, 6.10.2004 SEC(2004) 1199 , Political criteria, Democracy and the rule of law, The executive, p.15
[67] Group of States Against Corruption, First Evaluation Round Compliance Report on Bulgaria, Adopted by GRECO at its 18th Plenary Meeting (Strasbourg, 10-14 May 2004), Analysis, Recommendation iv., p.4
[68] European Commission, Bulgaria 2005 Comprehensive Monitoring Report, {COM (2005) 534 final}, Brussels, 25 October 2005 SEC (2005) 1352, Political criteria, Implementation of recommendations for improvements, Public administration, p.7
[69] Group of States Against Corruption, Second evaluation round, Evaluation Report on Bulgaria, Adopted by GRECO at its 24 th Plenary Meeting, (Strasbourg, 27 June – 1 July 2005), Theme ii – Public administration and corruption, Description of the situation, Transparency, p.9
[70] Commission of the European Communities, 2004 Regular Report on Romania’s progress towards accession, {COM(2004) 657 final}, Brussels, 6.10.2004, SEC(2004) 1200, Political criteria, p.14
[71] Commission of the European Communities, 2004 Regular Report on Romania’s progress towards accession, {COM(2004) 657 final}, Brussels, 6.10.2004, SEC(2004) 1200, Political criteria, Democracy and the rule of law, The executive, p.16 -17
[72] Commission of the European Communities, 2004 Regular Report on Romania’s progress towards accession, {COM(2004) 657 final}, Brussels, 6.10.2004, SEC(2004) 1200, Political criteria, Democracy and the rule of law, The executive, p. 17
[73] Commission of the European Communities, 2004 Regular Report on Romania’s progress towards accession, {COM(2004) 657 final}, Brussels, 6.10.2004, SEC(2004) 1200, Political criteria, Human rights and the protection of minorities, Civil and political rights, p.27
[74] Commission of the European Communities, 2004 Regular Report on Romania’s progress towards accession, {COM(2004) 657 final}, Brussels, 6.10.2004, SEC(2004) 1200, Political criteria, General evaluation, p.31
[75] Commission of the European Communities, 2004 Regular Report on Romania’s progress towards accession, {COM(2004) 657 final}, Brussels, 6.10.2004, SEC(2004) 1200, Conclusion, p.147
[76] Group of States Against Corruption, Second Evaluation Round, Evaluation Report on Romania, Adopted by GRECO at its 25th Plenary Meeting (Strasbourg, 10 – 14 October 2005), Theme ii – Public administration and corruption, Description of the situation, Transparency in public administration, p.9
[77] Ibid, p.9
[78] Group of States Against Corruption, Second Evaluation Round, Evaluation Report on Romania, Adopted by GRECO at its 25th Plenary Meeting (Strasbourg, 10 – 14 October 2005), Theme ii – Public administration and corruption, Analysis, p.15
[79] Ibid, p.15
[80] Ibid, p.15
