almanac on security sector oversight in the Western Balkans

Montenegro
of Public Procurement, the State Audit Institution, the Police Administration
and the state prosecution was not effective. This can be seen by the fact that
DRI and the Commission (in spite of findings) have not filed criminal charges,
while the Police Department independently applied only three criminal charges
within three years, on suspicions of alleged abuse of official position in the
procurement procedure. It is not well known amongst the public that the court
has issued any final decision in this area. This argument is certainly not in favor
of criminal responsibility when the security sector in question. Also, there are
some omissions in political accountability. For example, the Government of
Montenegro has made a serious omission when it comes to appointing members
of the Commission for the Control of Public Procurement.
As far as the public procurement is concerned, lower level of its transparency is
related to the fact that the MoD, the MoI, NSA and the Police Directorate are
exempt from legal procedures for public procurement. According to primary
laws regulating activities of the security sector in Montenegro, acquisition of
special technical equipment, armament and premises used for the security sector
needs, are not subject to principles of compulsory public announcement.
The fact that various legal provisions are not complete, that the public had
no insight into the activities of actors in the security sector after reports and
recommendations of the State Audit Institution, the relatively weak administrative
capacity at almost all levels, are the main reasons why the grade for
financial transparency in the security sector is 2.5.
Recommendations:
Budget Transparency:
• Improvement of budgeting process and managing finances along with
strengthening of capacities for preparation and implementation of the
budget in order to establish priorities in the security sector. (MoF)
• Enhancement of decentralization in the process of passing of the budget and
developing communication with all relevant stakeholders. (MoF)
• Introduction of compulsory practice that the entire budgeting cycle includes
“Monthly reports”. (MoF)
• Although budgeting in the security sector in Montenegro is considered
responsive and accountable to the public, Citizens’ Budget as a non-technical,
accessible version of the budget aimed at increasing public understanding of
the Government’s plans for taxing and spending, has to be introduced. The
Institute of Citizens’ Budget might be worked out by various external and
independent watch-dog groups from the civil scene, advocating rational and
transparent spending of public resources, as an alternative to the state budget,
which would also advocate a new model of budget and finances. (MoF)
• The State Audit Institutions (SAI) has to continue to be open for communication
with the civil sector. (SAI)
• The number of staff in the SAI should be increased.. Namely, due to the lack
of sufficient human resources, the SAI is unable to perform annual audits of
all entities. (SAI)
• Establish closer cooperation between the SAI and jurisdictional bodies in
order to get authorization for bringing criminal charges against subjects of
revision. (SAI)
• The SAI needs, in accordance with its legally regulated competencies, to perform
an analysis of application and effects of adopted laws and initiate their
amendments in order to improve the work of the public sector. (SAI)
• Strengthening and developing the advisory function of the SAI especially to
Grades
297
Almanac on Security Sector Oversight in the Western Balkans