Insight view

Recommendations

Info

THE COUNTRY: PUBLIC GOODS BERANSELO CASE Citizens won ecologic terror Locals from Beranselo were in a hopeless situation with un-selective and illegal waste disposal. According to some estimates, in the last ten years up to a million tons of waste was disposed of at the landfill, Vasove vode. After unsuccessful attempts of locals to inform about problems the waste dump caused, three years ago they started with blockades in order to prohibit waste disposal. A few TV shows (e.g. “Robin Hood”) were devoted to environmental catastrophe in the north of the country. Representatives of competent institutions admitted then on TV that waste disposal was illegal, but the Prosecution Office did not react to this public recognition. Citizens believed that this was long term systematic ecological terror over locals of Beranselo, who fought to return the natural purpose to Vasove vode, which was not an illegal landfill of dangerous waste. Locals from Beranselo finally won, when the country gave up of further waste disposal at Vasove vode, before local elections in 2014. Everything resulted in the decision of the government on the recovery of the largest landfill in the north of Montenegro. Through this case, the message to competent institutions was that the citizens of Montenegro, in contrast with decision makers, recognized environment as one of the priority areas, and that the fight of locals from Beranselo is the fight of all the people aware of ecology, notwithstanding what part of ecological state they live in. In this case, citizens recognized the consequences of inappropriate waste disposal and invited people responsible for this situation. In this case, locals defended the legal order of Montenegro as an ecological state and the country that strives for the rule of law, especially when it comes to protection of environment by the Constitution and a number of laws, including the Criminal Code, and a number of international contracts. Photo: www.vijesti.me Mr. Đorđije Tomović, who passed away, will be remembered as the eldest man in Beranselo, and as a recognizable man who fought for clean air and a healthy environment 75
10 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE - INSIGHT VIEW FIGHT FOR VALDANOS Instead of olives, concrete-work planned Olive grove in Valdanos and the whole Uvala was expropriated in 1978, with the explanation “for the needs of defense…” and right after this, a military beach resort was built. Owners initiated a fight for the property restitution in 1980, before courts of former Yugoslavia. According to information from the study of the Institute for Subtropic Culture in Bar that has been done when the restitution was announced, it was proved that olives were bought for a very low price, while a much higher amount—three to five times higher—was paid in short order to a minority that filed appeal (4-5% out of 204 owners). Besides the fact that a specific number of owners have never reconciled with expropriation and did not take the compensation, two grounds are indisputable for restitution: public interest has never been determined, and the land was not brought to intended use, and legal compensation has never been paid to the majority. The Municipal Commission, established and in operation until 2007, started with restitution of land and olives to previous owners. Then the Amendments of Law on Restitution were adopted; they pronounced all expropriations after 1974 as legal. This was obviously done with the intention to not return the property to Valdanos. This was done due to the plans that later became clear after the adoption of the study and the opening of an international competition for the “valorization” of Valdanos. The study of Valdanos spurs suspicions that this is an illegal and damaging job that speaks to intentions for preparation of the terrain for purchasers or already known investment. This study has been adopted in irregular procedure, and its content is scandalous. Public debate for the Location Study was opened at the end of 2008, and only seven days later the tender was published. However the tender was published without a previously adopted plan document, or without participation and respect of all the standpoints of all interested sides in this procedure that can only give it legitimacy. In this case, standards were drastically breached, which prescribe obligation on participation and respect of local community and professional public in the adopting of strategic programs and projects. 76
Page 2 and 3:
10 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE Insight vi
Page 4 and 5:
Table of contents INTRODUCTION ....
Page 6 and 7:
Introduction Dear Madam/Sir, This p
Page 8 and 9:
SLUČAJEVI IZ PRAKSE THE COUNTRY: H
Page 10 and 11:
THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS Responsib
Page 12 and 13:
THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS Three ve
Page 14 and 15:
THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS Work in t
Page 16 and 17:
THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS The LGBT
Page 18 and 19:
THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS The viola
Page 20 and 21:
THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS MANIPULAT
Page 22 and 23:
THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS Participa
Page 24 and 25:
THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION
Page 26 and 27: THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS LAW ON CI
Page 28 and 29: THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS REHABILIT
Page 30 and 31: THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS LEGAL FRA
Page 32 and 33: THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS YOUTH POL
Page 34 and 35: THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS JOURNALIS
Page 36 and 37: THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS “Sevent
Page 38 and 39: THE COUNTRY: HUMAN RIGHTS EUROPEAN
Page 40 and 41: SLUČAJEVI IZ PRAKSE THE COUNTRY: E
Page 42 and 43: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY Work o
Page 44 and 45: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY Guara
Page 46 and 47: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY NAI sp
Page 48 and 49: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY Tax de
Page 50 and 51: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY MANAGE
Page 52 and 53: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY Misuse
Page 54 and 55: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY Privat
Page 56 and 57: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY INTERN
Page 58 and 59: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY Real E
Page 60 and 61: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY Averag
Page 62 and 63: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY NEOLIB
Page 64 and 65: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY SUPREM
Page 66 and 67: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY UNSUST
Page 68 and 69: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY Expect
Page 70 and 71: THE COUNTRY: ECONOMIC POLICY Before
Page 72 and 73: SLUČAJEVI IZ PRAKSE THE COUNTRY: P
Page 74 and 75: THE COUNTRY: PUBLIC GOODS ues of su
Page 78 and 79: THE COUNTRY: PUBLIC GOODS Work on t
Page 80 and 81: THE COUNTRY: PUBLIC GOODS CARE ABOU
Page 82 and 83: THE COUNTRY: PUBLIC GOODS Right to
Page 84 and 85: THE COUNTRY: PUBLIC GOODS Trends o
Page 86 and 87: THE COUNTRY: PUBLIC GOODS FINANCING
Page 88 and 89: THE COUNTRY: PUBLIC GOODS ATTITUDE
Page 90 and 91: THE COUNTRY: PUBLIC GOODS NATIONAL
Page 92 and 93: THE COUNTRY: PUBLIC GOODS CONFUSING
Page 94 and 95: SLUČAJEVI IZ PRAKSE THE COUNTRY: S
Page 96 and 97: THE COUNTRY: SERVICE TO CITIZENS Ph
Page 98 and 99: THE COUNTRY: SERVICE TO CITIZENS EL
Page 100 and 101: THE COUNTRY: SERVICE TO CITIZENS Th
Page 102 and 103: THE COUNTRY: SERVICE TO CITIZENS BR
Page 104 and 105: THE COUNTRY: SERVICE TO CITIZENS OP
Page 106 and 107: THE COUNTRY: SERVICE TO CITIZENS US
Page 108 and 109: THE COUNTRY: SERVICE TO CITIZENS Of
show all

Insight view

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?