E l e c t r on i c mon th l y maga z i n e f o r Eu r op ean i n t e g r a t i on - No . 4 1 , F e b rua ry 2 0 0 9

European pulse

AAAANNNNAAAALLLLYYYYSSSSEEEESSSSThe blockade of

Montenegro'sapplication in the

Council of EUspells trouble for

\ukanovi}'scabinet

IIIINNNNTTTTEEEERRRRVVVVIIIIEEEEWWWWProf. dr Tanja

Mi{~evi}

DDDDOOOOCCCCUUUUMMMMEEEENNNNTTTTSSSSHow the

governmentprepares for EC

questionnaireFFFFOOOOCCCCUUUUSSSS OOOOFFFF TTTTHHHHIIIISSSS IIIISSSSSSSSUUUUEEEEHow close is Montenegro tothe white Schengen list

2Eur op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9F o r eword / Ca l enda r

PPRROOXXIIMMIITTYYProximity is a relative notion. The same

thing may be close for some, distant forothers.

For the taste of most citizens of EU theWestern Balkans drew a tat too close, whileon this side we should realise how far we arestill from European values.

Recently the Czech Foreign AffairsMinister Karel Schwarzenberg said theCouncil of Ministers of EU was "nearing con-sensus" on the issue of asking the EuropeanCommission to create a Questionnaire forMontenegro.

"Nearing consensus" means that at leastone EU member state doesn't supportMontenegro's application. Serbia's road toEU has been obstructed for years by a sin-gle member state - the Netherlands, whichis why Belgrade is always close, but neverclose enough to catching up withMacedonia, Montenegro and Albania.

Expectations that our application willland on the table of the Council of Ministersalready in March or a little later should thusbe met with moderate optimism.

It is a fact that during January andFebruary four EU member states refusedMontenegro's bid. The key reason was prob-ably that the authorities in Germany,Netherlands, Belgium and Spain are fearingthe public reaction to any sign of further EUenlargement and pursuing their own inter-ests, unrelated and unknown to us.

On the other hand, they can alwaysboast loudly that in fact they are opposingany further advances by Montenegro since itsauthorities are not working hard enough oneradicating crime and corruption.

What is worrying in the whole applica-tion story is the prospect of Montenegrobeing rooted to the spot (close to or far awayfrom EU) for entire 12 months should theCouncil of Minister refuse to ask theCommission to submit the Questionnaire inthe next two months.

Then comes June with the elections forthe European Parliament, reconstituting theCommission, summer holidays...

The Questionnaire could arrive only inthe end of the year, although we submittedthe application on 15 December last year.

And that's far. V.@.

Netherlands ratified the SAA (29 January) - The Dutch Parliament has ratified theStabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) between Montenegro and EU. TheNetherlands is the thirteenth EU member to have ratified Montenegro's SAA.

Poland gives a green light to SAA (6 February) - Poland ratified the Stabilisationand Association Agreement between Montenegro and EU.

Scanning the Roadmap (9 February) - European Commission experts visitedPodgorica and examined the situation with regard to the implementation ofrequirements of the Roadmap for visa liberalisation regarding personal documents.On 22 February another group of experts should visit Podgorica with the task ofstudying the final two blocks of the Roadmap - public security and basic rights.

Twinning project unveiled (12 February) - A Twinning project on legal harmon-isation of Montenegro's administration and institutions with EU standards waspresented in Podgorica. The project, worth 1.1 million euros, is financed by EU.In the course of 21 months some 50 experts from Slovenia will be transferringtheir knowledge to the employees of the Secretariat for European Integrations,Secretariat for Legislation, Parliament and ministries. The leader of the project onbehalf of the Slovenian government, Andrej Engelman said that twinning is a "uni-fied system" beginning with in the ministry with an employee drafting a law andending in the parliament. "This whole system ought to work in the same tune,according to the same laws".

Emphasis on administrative capacities (18 February) - The temporary ECCommittee and representatives of Montenegro met in the context of theEnhanced Permanent Dialogue on transportation, energy, environment andregional policy. The official announcement stated that the meeting was focusedon legal harmonisation and development of administrative capacities in theseareas.

An obstacle to application (19 February) - Germany, Netherlands, Belgium andSpain vetoed the scheduling of discussion on Montenegro's membership applica-tion on the agenda of the Council of Ministers. Most other member states believethis is a "technical, not political" issue, and that the Council ought to simply orderthe Commission to create a Questionnaire for Montenegro, like it was the casewith all other countries before. However, Germany is opposing the move, insist-ing that Montenegro did not make enough progress in the key reform areas andfearing that another move of Podgorica towards integration could sprout a waveof applications from the Western Balkans. Netherlands and Belgium believe thatMontenegro did not do enough in fighting corruption, and The Hague does notwant risk being accused for double standards because of its unswerving stancetowards Serbia's integration process.

There's still hope (23 February) - EU isclose to a consensus to give EC a man-date to evaluate Montenegro's readinessto become a candidate, said KarelSchwarzenberg, foreign affairs minister ofthe Czech Republic after the meeting ofthe Council of Ministers in Brussels.Schwarzenberg, whose country will bepresiding over the EU until June said hedid not rule out the option that theCouncil of Ministers would adopt positivedecision already at the next meeting, on16 March. Karel Schwarzenberg

3Eu r op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9A t t i t ud e

Between 1995and 2007 the

EU has almostdoubled itsm e m b e r s h i p ,from 15 to 27m e m b e r s ,

accepting more new member statesthan ever before within a very shorttime span.

Unfortunately, this rapid expan-sion has not been preceded by thenecessary strengthening of its institu-tional functioning, in particular itsdecision making capacity. Since 2004,the EU has found it even more diffi-cult and time-consuming to arrive atthe necessary compromises betweenincreasingly diverging interests ofmember states. The addition of 12new has only superficially strengthenedthe EU. Every new member state, smallor big, enhances EU diversity, which isan enrichment but also a burden.

Enlargement therefore has a price,which we have tended to ignore in thepost - 1989 euphoria of European re-unification. So far it has hardly led tothe hoped for strengthening of the EU.

Still, the EU continues enlarging asif it had not learned much from theexperience of the last two waves. Ithas offered the seven countries of theWestern Balkan, two of which canhardly be considered full-fledged sta-ble states, a "European perspective".

With Croatia, negotiations havebeen under way for three years, andthere is hope they might be conclud-ed by the end of 2009. EU has grant-ed Macedonia a status of "candidatecountry". Montenegro has filed its for-mal request for membership inDecember 2008.

The way things stand right now,

however, the accession process of theWestern Balkan countries is likely todrag until 2020 and even beyond.That should suit everybody. Both theEU and the Balkan countries will needa lot of time to fully prepare.

The EU will have to digest theLisbon Treaty, which is a "sine quanon" for any additional membership.

And its success is by no meansassured: what are all the new functionsreally supposed to be, like the"President of the European Council"?Will he have political authority or beno more than a Secretary General witha more pompous name? Will the "HighRepresentative" be strong enough toshape an EU foreign policy thatdeserves this name, against oppositionfrom big member states? Will the

Council make it a habit of voting onall Commission proposals? Will theCommission be more effective in"leading" the EU, with its membershipdue to reach 34 after the completionof the Balkan enlargement?

Since 2005, the EU is also nego-tiating on Turkish accession. It does sowithout much zeal, as the unevenprogress of the Turkish and Croatiannegotiations shows. It has opened onlyhalf of the more than 30 chapters andprovisionally closed one. Cypriot andFrench opposition have preventednegotiations from progressing faster.

Turkey would have to wait wellafter 2020, and possibly after anotherTreaty change, before it might eventu-ally join.

Turkey is a "big fish" for the EU, interms historical and cultural baggage. Ifit ever joins EU, it would the biggestcountry population-wise and accord-ingly claim an adequate say and status.

Like some former communist membercountries, Turkey lacks a tradition offreedom, democracy, political compro-mise and the rule of law. Its record ofhuman rights is anything but convinc-ing. The military continue to have big-ger political role than in any EU coun-try, despite many efforts to rein themin. Last not least, Turkish troops con-tinue to illegally occupy northernCyprus, which the EU considers its ter-ritory, though EU legislation does notapply there.

Similar considerations apply toUkraine and the three Caucasus coun-tries, whose relations with the EU aremuch weaker than Turkey's.

With all this in mind, the EUwould be well advised to refrain fromenlarging beyond the countries of the

Western Balkans and reaching east-ward beyond the Bulgarian andRumanian Black Sea beaches.

History shows again and againhow armies and empires have per-ished due to over-expansion andweakening links between the Centreand the Periphery. The EU shoulddraw the appropriate lessons. Its pres-ent size enables it to play a much big-ger role in the world; provided itstarts effectively bundling its forces. Aslong as member states are unwilling tostrengthen the EU at the expense oftheir own powers, the "acquisition" ofmore territory is likely to weaken theEU, which cannot be in Europe'sinterest.

The author is a senior analyst inthe European Policy Centre in Brusselsand the former Director for theMediterranean, Near and Middle Eastat the European Commission

A V I E W F R O M E U

Epo(u!mppl!upp!gbs!bifbe

by Eberhard Rhein

////////

TThhee wwaayy tthhiinnggss ssttaanndd rriigghhtt nnooww,, tthhee aacccceessssiioonn pprroocceessss ooff tthheeWWeesstteerrnn BBaallkkaann ccoouunnttrriieess iiss lliikkeellyy ttoo ddrraagg uunnttiill 22002200 aanndd bbeeyyoonndd..TThhaatt sshhoouulldd ssuuiitt eevveerryybbooddyy.. BBootthh tthhee EEUU aanndd tthhee BBaallkkaann ccoouunnttrriieesswwiillll nneeeedd aa lloott ooff ttiimmee ttoo ffuullllyy pprreeppaarree

4Eur op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9F o cu s o f t h i s i s s u e

Can you ima-gine yourself

in a few monthstravelling to 22European Unioncountries, Norway

and Iceland with only a passport in yourpocket?

There is no guarantee that the citi-zens of Montenegro will soon be able totravel to the countries of the Schengenzone without visas, but it seems ourcountry has already covered a good partof the Roadmap and that this may notbe impossible after all.

Unofficial sources suggest thatMontenegro could be put on a proba-tionary white Schengen list by the sec-ond half of 2009 for a period of sixmonths during which the EuropeanCommission would supervise theprocess.

According to the first reports of theEuropean Commission, only Macedoniaprogressed further than Montenegro inthe fulfilment of the requirements fromthe Roadmap, a document in which theEC stipulates all the steps to be taken bythe West Balkans countries in order toachieve visa liberalisation.

"Whoever works the hardest willget there first", promised the formervice chairmen of the EuropeanCommission Franco Frattini in thebeginning of negotiations on the liber-alisation of the visa regime, inFebruary 2008.

The second, less favourable sce-nario will be that the visa requirementwill be lifted for Montenegro in thesecond round, in early 2010, togetherwith Serbia.

One should bear in mind that theprocess of visa liberalisation is a deeplypolitical, and not only technical issue, asthe EU officials would like to present it.

Technically speaking, theCommission registers the extent towhich each of the countries fulfilled therequirements and proposes to theCouncil of Ministers of Justice andHome Affairs the countries that can bemoved to the white Schengen list.

The Council adopts the decisionunanimously, which means it is possiblefor any one of 27 EU members to vetoplacing Montenegro's on the white list.

On the other hand, the EC itself isnot immune to politics. One shouldtherefore not rule out the possibility ofthe EC turning a blind eye to some par-tial progress of Montenegro with regardto the Roadmap, in order to "compen-sate" for the blockade of its applicationfor the candidate status.

Besides, the EU has no reason to

worry that some 100 000 citizens ofMontenegro, who by the rough esti-mates of the authorities are in possessionof either the old or the new passport willinvade the European labour market. It isclear that Montenegro is currently in avery sensitive position and that bothcustom authority and other publicorgans responsible for border controlmust keep their eyes wide open.

Any larger illegal transport that hap-pens to pass through the Montenegrinborder and is caught in Italy or Croatiawould draw us further from the whiteSchengen.

The Roadmap is divided into fourareas - document security, illegal migra-tion, including readmission, public orderand security and foreign relations andbasic rights.

There are no negotiations betweenthe national governments and Brusselsabout the terms of this document. TheCommission simply estimates whetherthe national authorities have fulfilled allthe requirements.

The first two groups of EC expertsevaluated the progress in the first two

Representatives of the ruling coalition often speculated with the date of lib-eralisation of the visa regime. During the campaign for elections on 6 April

2008 the now President Filip Vujanovi} promised the citizens of Montenegrovisa-free travel to the countries of European Union by the end of 2008, andjust before the end of the same year Minister of Interior Jusuf Kalamperovi}suggested that the fateful day was just around the corner.

At the moment, representatives of the ruling coalition are curiously silentabout progress towards the white Schengen list, although the upcoming parlia-mentary elections offer plenty of opportunity to collect another few politicalpoints with the same promise.

VVIISSAA--FFRREEEE RREEGGIIMMEE AASS MMAANNIIPPUULLAATTIIOONN

H O W C L O S E I S M O N T E N E G R O T O T H E W H I T E S C H E N G E N L I S T

by Danilo Mihajlovi}

////////

phot

o VI

JEST

I

Dvtupn!pggjdfst!xjui!fzft!xjef!pqfo

Montenegrin passport

5Eu r op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9F o cu s o f t h i s i s s u e

areas last year and, according to theunofficial sources, produced a ratherpositive report on Montenegro.

However, whoever went to get newdocuments could predict that the ECexperts will have positive things to sayabout the first block of requirements.This is easily the only task that is beingdone practically impeccably byMontenegrin public administration, andthe documents were made according toall standards that rule out any possibilityof falsification.

By the end of October 2008 some60 000 biometric documents wereissued.

As for the second area, even beforeit got the Roadmap Montenegro signedreadmission agreements with most EUmembers.

As few persons left its territory ille-gally during the 1990s to go to one ofthe EU countries the implementation ofthese agreements went more or lesssmoothly.

The biggest headache for Monte-negrin authorities, as already noticed inthe course of submission of theRoadmap, will be some of the parts ofthe third chapter, where the Commissionwill assess the progress in eradicatingmoney laundering, crime and corrup-tion, focusing on cross-border activities.

Recently two groups of experts fromthe European Commission visited

Montenegro in order to evaluate itsprogress in these key areas.

Their report will be ready in April,and will probably be decisive for thefuture of visa liberalisation betweenMontenegro and EU.

In the Roadmap, Brussels asked forefficient implementation of the actionplan and strategy for the fight againstcorruption and organised crime (espe-cially its cross-border aspects), and inthis context emphasised the strengthen-ing of law-enforcement bodies, both

financially and in terms of personnel. Montenegro also has to implement

its national anti-trafficking strategy, adoptand ensure smooth implementation oflegislation related to money laundering,with adequate monitoring of all financialtransactions, including those related toreal estate and inward investment, andstrengthen the Directorate for thePrevention of Money Laundering.

In addition to this, the countryshould implement the national strategyand action plan for drug prevention,made available information on theamounts of confiscated drugs and per-

sons involved in these activities that areaccessible at border crossings, furtherdevelop cooperation and informationexchange with the relevant internationalbodies dealing with drug trafficking,adopt and implement legislation on theprevention and eradication of corruptionin line with the Action plan for the fightagainst corruption, implement the rele-vant UN and CoE conventions as well asrecommendations of GRECO and otherinternational standards in above areas, aswell as those regarding fight against ter-rorism.

Compared to the EuropeanCommission report on the progress ofMontenegro, the commitments relatedto the adoption of acquis communau-taire will not be an obstacle forMontenegro for reaching the whiteSchengen list.

According to this document that theEuropean Commission is sure to usewhen deciding on Montenegro's pre-paredness, the problems are likely toarise when Brussels arrives at the word"implement" which is often mentioned inthe Roadmap.

In some key areas, such as moneylaundering, corruption and crime, fightagainst terrorism, European Commissionnoted progress, but also the lack of willto implement the existing laws andmechanisms.

With regard to organised crime, ECreminds that all relevant action planshave been adopted, international coop-eration improved, but that administrativeand judicial capacities to deal with theseissue "remain limited".

"A multi-institutional centre for theexchange of information between differ-ent institutions, in order to establish anintegrated database is still lacking",reminds EC.

Although it was supposed to beadopted in 2008, there is still no sign ofa strategy for the fight against terrorism,and the representatives of the Ministry of

EEuurrooppeeaann CCoommmmiissssiioonn iiss nnoott iimmmmuunnee ttoo ppoolliittiiccss.. OOnnee sshhoouulldd tthheerree-ffoorree nnoott rruullee oouutt tthhee ppoossssiibbiilliittyy ooff tthhee EECC ttuurrnniinngg aa bblliinndd eeyyee ttoossoommee ppaarrttiiaall pprrooggrreessss ooff MMoonntteenneeggrroo wwiitthh rreeggaarrdd ttoo tthhee RRooaaddmmaapp,,iinn oorrddeerr ttoo ccoommppeennssaattee ffoorr tthhee bblloocckkaaddee ooff iittss aapppplliiccaattiioonn ffoorr ccaann-ddiiddaattee ssttaattuuss

[turanovi}, Ro}en, Fratini, Kalamperovi}

phot

o VI

JEST

I

6Eur op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9F o cu s o f t h i s i s s u e

Interior Affairs and Public Administration,Police Authority and Agency for NationalSecurity who are jointly responsible for itshift the blame from one to the other.

As for drugs, the Government stillhasn't established a national office fordrugs prevention, nor has it adopted arelevant strategy for dealing with thisissue.

It has, however, compiled anddelivered to the Commission informationon the amount of confiscated narcoticsand persons involved in drug smugglingavailable at the border crossings, as wellas information on international coopera-tion in this field.

"Transit and smuggling of drugs,especially when conducted by organisedcrime, remains a reason for concern",warns the EC.

The Government reports submittedto the Commission last Decemberemphasises that prosecution has beenintensifying cooperation with EUROJUST,which is another obligation from theRoadmap. Basic court prosecutor fromKotor, Boris Savi}, is the contact personfor cooperation with this institution.

In its report to Brussels in late 2008the Government states that much hasbeen done about money laundering, butthe European Commission warns that

Montenegro's efforts are still insufficientand must be improved.

"The legal framework must be com-pleted with necessary secondary acts",said EC in the Progress Report.

In this document, dated November2008, the EC deems the capacities ofthe police and prosecution for investi-gating cases of money laundering insuf-ficient, and warns that few such caseshave been submitted to the prosecutorby the police.

In the Progress Report the EC saysthat the government has adopted impor-tant international strategies related to thefight against corruption and augmentedresources of the Anti-Corruption Agency.However, they insist that strong andindependent monitoring and auditingbodies are still lacking that would eval-uate statements on property and financ-ing of political parties and monitor pri-vatisation, public procurement and statebudget.

Montenegro should have no prob-lems with the fourth block of theRoadmap dealing with relations to theneighbours, but the part on basic rightsand minorities may cause some concern.

The report to European Com-mission the Government reminds that inthe course of last year it has adoptedStrategy of minority policy for the peri-od 2008-2018.

Representatives of the nationalcouncils of minorities have recentlyaccused the government of violatingConstitutional norms related to theirrepresentation in the Parliament. Theywarned that the upcoming parliamentaryelections scheduled for 29 March will beunconstitutional if they take placeaccording to the existing regulations.

The Government has still notadopted the law prohibiting discrimina-tion, which is another obligation fromthe Roadmap.

Should the European Commissionsuggest lifting the visa requirement forMontenegro in the next two to threemonths, it will be one of the best thingsthat happened to us in years. It will alsomean that they're turning a blind eye.

The author is a journalist of thedaily newspaper "Vijesti"

According to the Roadmap, Podgorica is obliged to adopt and implementrelevant legislation on confiscation of the property of criminals (including

regulations on cross-border crime)Montenegrin officials have repeatedly emphasised that such confiscation

has been defined by the Criminal Codex.There is no public information on whether the authorities have to date

confiscated any luxury houses or automobiles of people who have been foundto be on the other side of the law.

Based on what Montenegro achieved so far in implementing the require-ments from the Roadmap the Commission will present its own evaluation,bearing in mind the inter-alia criteria - the percentage of visa applicationsrefused and the percentage of refused entries to Montenegrin citizens on thecommon Schengen borders. There should be a diminishing tendency in thenumber of refused visa application. The indicative reference will be 3% of visaapplications refused, with a maximum of 1 000 refused entries to the Schengenzone per year. Montenegro should also undertake the necessary measures toensure efficient implementation of common objectives regarding prohibition oftravel. As has been mentioned before, the Commission will use these indica-tors to suggest to the Council of EU to lift the visa requirement for Montenegrincitizens travelling to EU, by amending the Council Regulation 539/2001 andfollowing the procedure from the EC2 Agreement for these matters. Upon theCommission's proposal, and after consulting the European Parliament, theCouncil will decide on the matter based on qualified majority vote. Such anamendment could soon encompass all bearers of travel documents that com-ply with the ICAO and EC requirements.

In its first report, in the block related to public order and security, ECwarns against insufficient cooperation between the relevant institutions as wellas the lack of investigative and operative capacities which represent a seriousobstacle to efficient implementation of the laws.

"Further efforts are needed to develop legislative framework...Also, thereshould be greater efforts to ensure adequate functioning of the system", statesthe chapter on the free movement of citizens, as well as to guarantee accessto ID and travel documents for all citizens, displaced persons and refuges, lawspreventing discrimination and minority protection.

UUUUNNNNPPPPOOOOPPPPUUUULLLLAAAARRRR MMMMEEEEAAAASSSSUUUURRRREEEESSSSSSSSTTTTIIIILLLLLLLL UUUUNNNNIIIIMMMMPPPPLLLLEEEEMMMMEEEENNNNTTTTEEEEDDDD

7Eu r op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9Ana ly s e s

For the nextmonth, the

M o n t e n e g r i nGovernment willbe fighting twobattles simultane-ously - at home

and in the EU. Afterwards, it can focus allof its efforts on the EU, with dubiouschances to convince every EU memberstate to accept further processing ofMontenegro's bid to become a candidatefor EU membership.

And while it is currently facing therefusal of four EU members to acceptapplication and forward it to the EuropeanCommission to create a Questionnaire, andlobbying Germany, Netherlands, Belgiumand Spain to change their minds, at homethe Government is trying to convince thepublic that there is no blockade. Thosewere the categorical words of the head ofMontenegrin diplomacy MMiillaann RRoo}}eenn andthe deputy head of the Government DrGGoorrddaannaa \\uurroovvii}}, who maintained thateverything was going as planned, butrefrained from prognoses as to the exactdate when Montenegro will get the greenlight to proceed. In expectance of the 29March parliamentary elections, such moveson the part of the government representa-tives can be understood as a part of thecampaign, intended to create the image ofa Government that controls every lever ofits European agenda.

On the other hand, the head of theMontenegro's Mission to Brussels SSllaavviiccaaMMiillaa~~ii}} practically confirms that the appli-cation is currently blocked.

"A number of countries believe that atthe moment discussing Montenegro'sapplication would be a political issue. Sofar, it was only a technical matter of theCouncil of EU asking the Commission toprepare the Questionnaire and give anopinion. Only after the EC produces apositive opinion the Council of EU would

have a substantial debate on whether thecountry is really ready to acquire candidatestatus", Said Mila~i}.

Given the current situation, it is dis-putable whether everything will go asusual, with the Council of EU asking theCommission for the Questionnaire within afew months after the submission of appli-cation.

It was already clear that the thingsmay not be as smooth as that when, at themeeting of EU foreign affairs ministers on27 January the Council refused the Czechpresidency's proposal to put Montenegro'sapplication on the agenda.

Most vociferous were the Germans,who suggested that this could also encour-age Serbia and Albania to submit their own

applications. They feared that this mightstrengthen the opposition vote to furtherenlargement in their national constituen-cies, and thus undermine the position oftheir own government. The situation is allthe more precarious in Berlin in light ofthe upcoming September elections.

The next most committed opponent toplacing Montenegro's application on theagenda of this meeting was the Netherlands.The Hague has already firmly opposed thesigning of the Stabilisation and AssociationAgreement (SAA) between EU and Serbia,arguing that the most important reforms arestill lacking, which is why Serbia has beenunable to arrest RRaattkkoo MMllaaddii}} and deliverhim to the war crimes tribunal. They wouldnot want to be accused for any doublestandards in the Western Balkans and thusthey maintain the same unyielding stancetowards Montenegro, judging that Podgoricadid not do enough to combat crime andcorruption.

Their position is supported by Spainand Belgium, and if Montenegro wants toget its application procedure moving, itwill have to focus its efforts on these four

EU countries, for all decisions in theCouncil of Foreign Affairs Ministers of EUare adopted unanimously.

France's position has changed striking-ly in the last few months. Once the mostreserved country in the matters regardingMontenegro, it has turned, according tounofficial sources, into an active advocatefor processing Montenegro's application inthe Council of Ministers.

The reasons for such a move on thepart of Paris can again be found in thebroader context - if it goes throughMontenegro's application now, the EU willnot see the applications of Albania andSerbia, expected some time in mid-2009piling up on its table as well. If it waits todiscuss all three applications at the same

time, it may run a greater risk of negativeresponses across the European public towhat they might perceive to be anotherwave of EU enlargement.

It seems that such "waves" of newmembers are not something the EU candigest any more. Ever since May 2004when ten new members from East CentralEurope joined its ranks, the EU has had toweather the internal difficulties. Angry thatnobody asked them about the enlarge-ment, the citizens of "old" EU vented theirdiscontent at referendums on the internaltransformation of EU (France, Netherlands2005), feeling that their voice is not lis-tened to properly. This at least a part ofexplanation for the failure of the first EUconstitution.

The attempt of \\uukkaannoovvii}}'s cabinetto "unfreeze" application is not likely to besuccessful if he continues wasting energyon trying to convince the domestic publicthat everything is all right. Instead, just likethey did with Paris in December last year,they should now turn their efforts to con-vincing Berlin, Hague, Brussels andMadrid.

T H E B L O C K A D E O F M O N T E N E G R O ' S A P P L I C A T I O N I N T H E C O U N C I L O F E US P E L L S T R O U B L E F O R T H E M O N T E N E G R I N G O V E R N M E N T

by Ne|eljko Rudovi}

////////Cbuumf!po!uxp!gspout

TThhee aatttteemmpptt ooff \\uukkaannoovvii}}''ss ccaabbiinneett ttoo ""uunnffrreeeezzee"" aapppplliiccaattiioonn iiss nnoottlliikkeellyy ttoo bbee ssuucccceessssffuull iiff tthheeyy ccoonnttiinnuuee wwaassttiinngg eenneerrggyy oonn ppeerrssuuaadd-iinngg tthhee ddoommeessttiicc ppuubblliicc tthhaatt eevveerryytthhiinngg iiss aallll rriigghhtt.. IInnsstteeaadd,, jjuussttlliikkee tthheeyy ddiidd wwiitthh PPaarriiss iinn DDeecceemmbbeerr llaasstt yyeeaarr,, tthheeyy sshhoouulldd nnoowwffooccuuss tthheeiirr eeffffoorrttss ttoo ccoonnvviinnccee BBeerrlliinn,, HHaagguuee,, BBrruusssseellss aanndd MMaaddrriidd

8Eur op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9In t e r v i ew

Prof Dr TTaannjjaa MMii{{~~eevvii}}, formerhead of the Office of EU inte-

gration in the Government of Serbiaand one of the most acclaimedexperts on the European integrationprocess in the Western Balkans saidthere was no reason to be put offby the delay of Montenegro's appli-cation.

"This is nothing unusual. I don'tknow many applications that wereconsidered within a month or twoafter they were submitted, especial-ly since Montenegro submitted itsapplication just before the changeof EU presidency. There is alwaysdisagreement among the memberswhether to begin the procedure orleave it for later", says Mi{~evi} inthe interview for the EuropeanPulse.

According to her, the Czechpresidency is willing to put theMontenegrin application on the

agenda of the Council of Ministers,and also to discuss speeding up theprocess of integration of the West

Balkan countries."Such decisions in the EU

require a consensus between 27member states. At the moment,there is no such consensus and noindication that it will be achievedsoon, but I do not believe weshould be put off by it. In my opin-ion, everything is going as usual atthe moment. We will have to waitand see how it develops further",Mi{~evi} said.

WWhhaatt ccoonnsseeqquueenncceess ccoouullddtthhee bblloocckkaaddee ooff MMoonntteenneeggrroo''ssaapppplliiccaattiioonn hhaavvee ffoorr MMoonntteenneeggrrooaanndd ffoorr tthhee WWeesstteerrnn BBaallkkaannss??

I would say that becoming acandidate country is the mostimportant step for a country. This isthe beginning of serious reforms,

D R T A N J A M I [ ] E V I ] , P R O F E S S O R A T T H E F A C U L T Y O F P O L I T I C A L S C I E N C E I NB E L G R A D E

Xf!tipvme!opu!xbju!voujmFV!tpmwft!jut!qspcmfnt

Tanja Mi{~evi}

phot

o VI

JEST

I

When will EU turn to the Western Balkans again?As soon as the Treaty of Lisbon is ratified. We will receive what they call

the "renewed approval" that will set integrations into motion.At least this was the practice throughout EU's history. Every crisis was fol-

lowed by deeper and closer cooperation between the member states.I expect this moment to come in the second half of this year. That would

be the best case scenario. There is also the worst case scenario, which is thatthe Irish might say "no" again. I don't think this will be the case, however.Latest opinion polls show that a majority of Irish citizens will vote in favour ofthe Treaty.

Do you agree that the worst possible scenario for the Western Balkanswould be to remain stuck between an EU which is tired of enlargements andthe regional political elites which are not ready for profound reforms?

This is indeed the biggest danger.

CCCCRRRRIIIISSSSEEEESSSS HHHHAAAAVVVVEEEE MMMMAAAADDDDEEEE EEEEUUUU SSSSTTTTRRRROOOONNNNGGGGEEEERRRR

9Eur op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9In t e r v i ew

opening the questionsthat have remainedclose so far, this iswhen we reach thepoint of no return. Forour region, every day,indeed every year, lostin this process is aproblem.

OOppppoossiittiioonn iinnMMoonntteenneeggrroo bbeelliieevveesstthhaatt oonnee ooff tthhee rreeaassoonnssffoorr bblloocckkiinngg tthhee aappppllii-ccaattiioonn iiss tthhaatt tthhee ggoovv-eerrnnmmeenntt,, eevveerr ssiinnccee iittssuubbmmiitttteedd tthhee aapppplliiccaa-ttiioonn,, ddiidd sshhooww aa ssiinngglleessiiggnn ooff rreeaaddiinneessss ttooeennggaaggee iinn kkeeyy rreeffoorrmmss..WWhhaatt iiss yyoouurr ooppiinniioonn??

I think there's a bitof everything to it.

The question ofenlargement is at themoment not the mostwelcome one in theEU. There is still somefatigue left over fromthe previous enlargement andbefore the EU could recover it raninto a major financial crisis, and westill don't know whether the worst

is over.There is a serious fear of

unemployment in the EU, and itbreeds opposition to the accessionof new countries.

We should nothowever, and here Imean the entire region,wait for the EU to getback on its feet.

A region or a coun-try that aspires tobecome a part of theEU must understandthat only by actingresponsibly, i.e. by ful-filling its obligations itcan become a seriouspartner for EU.

WWiitthh tthhee eelleecc-ttiioonnss ffoorr tthhee EEuurrooppeeaannPPaarrlliiaammeenntt ccoommiinngg uuppiinn JJuunnee,, iinn ccaassee tthheeaapppplliiccaattiioonn iiss nnoott ccoonn-ssiiddeerreedd bbyy tthhee CCoouunncciillooff MMiinniisstteerrss iinn tthhee nneexxttttwwoo mmoonntthhss,, wwiillllMMoonntteenneeggrroo hhaavvee ttoowwaaiitt ffoorr tthhee SSwweeddiisshhpprreessiiddeennccyy??

We will be runninginto a trap if we try tojustify this with the

elections and the global economiccrisis. One should look at thesethings in technical terms.

In this phase of the accessionthe role of the European Parliamentis perfectly marginal. Everythingdepends on the Council ofMinisters and the EuropeanCommission.

BBuutt tthhee eelleeccttiioonnss ffoorr tthheeEEuurrooppeeaann PPaarrlliiaammeenntt mmeeaann tthhee nneewwccoommppoossiittiioonn ooff tthhee CCoommmmiissssiioonn??

This will not prevent theCommission, in case it receives therequest from the Council ofMinisters, to start working on theQuestionnaire for Montenegro.

The recomposition of theCommission will not take very long.

I repeat again, however, we justhave to impose ourselves on EU'sagenda.

VV.. @@UUGGII]]

Could a slowdown in EU integration of the Western Balkan be com-pensated by moving some of these countries to the white Schengen list evenbefore they fulfil the requirements from the Roadmap?

I don't think that is possible. The question of moving to the white Schengen list is absolutely a techni-

cal question. You will get as much as you have earned. Do you know whether the Commission has been satisfied with the

progress of some of the West Balkan countries towards liberalisation of the visaregime?

As far as I know, they are quite satisfied. Much has been done. What is still left to evaluate is the implementation of the laws, many of

which have been adopted precisely because of the white Schengen list, andto prove that institutions can perform well.

With the current trends in Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro, I believewe have quite a good chance to achieve full or probationary liberalisation ofthe visa regime with EU.

I believe that this year will, first of all, bring visa-free travel to our citi-zens, and then we can talk about candidacies in the years to come.

TTHHEE YYEEAARR OOFF VVIISSAA LL IIBBEERRAALL IISSAATTIIOONN

phot

o VI

JEST

I

10Eur op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9Po l i c y

In December2001 in Laeken

the Summit of theheads of states andgovernments ofEuropean Union,decided to establisha European

Convention as from the February 2002. TheConvention consisted of 105 members andwas chaired by the former French presidentValery Giscard d'Estaign.The mandate of theConvention was clear and narrowly defined:prepare the draft of a Constitution for EUthat would replace numerous Treaties thathave founded the norms and principles ofEU's functioning.

The Convention was also responsible forregaining legitimacy for the overall process ofEuropean integrations. The text of theConstitutional Treaty was supposed to makeEU more democratic, transparent and effi-cient. Establishment of the Convention wasthe most important element of institutionbuilding in the European Union since the firstdirect elections for the European Parliamentin 1979 and the Maastricht Treaty in 1992.

Creation of the Convention -the Laeken Summit

In December 2001, towards the end ofBelgian presidency over EU a regular summitof the heads of states and governments of EUmembers took place in Laeken, in the out-skirts of Brussels. The most important out-come of the meeting was the adoption of theDeclaration on the Future of EuropeanUnion, which contained a discussion onchallenges facing the EU both in relation tothe outside world and in relation to its future

enlargement and internal institutional reform.The Summit in Laeken was organised at

the moment when numerous importantchanges were taking place both within EUand outside of its borders. One of the cru-cial results of the summit was that, for thefirst time, the EU spelled out clearly the

names of the ten countries that were tobecome its new members in May 2004, join-ing the family that had so far consisted onlyof the privileged few West European coun-tries. Terrorist actions of 11 September 2001imposed the imperative of a common immi-gration and asylum policy and directed EU'sattention towards the issues of Europeansecurity related to taking greater responsibili-ty in securing peace and stability in theEuropean backyards - both in the Balkansand in the Middle East.

A separate chapter of the Declarationwas dedicated to the establishment of theEuropean Convention and key actors to beinvolved in the debates on the future of EU.Declaration states that the reason for creatingthe Convention was the desire to establish asinge body that would discuss all issues ofimportance for the development of EU andarticulate possible responses to the currentchallenges.

The final outcome of the work of theConvention was to be a document contain-ing interpretations of various ideas regardingthe common future of European nations or asingle harmonised opinion that would beadopted as a recommendation at the follow-ing inter-governmental conference of EU

member states, whose task would be toestablish clear guidelines for further develop-ment of European Union. Among its taskswas also to prepare a document that couldreplace the founding treaties of EU anddefine the character of this community thatfor half a century has been in a state of per-petual change.

The structure of the ConventionEuropean Council appointed the former

French President Giscard d'Estaing the

Chairman of the Convention and GiulianoAmato and Jean-LLuc Dehaen as Vice-Chairmen. The choice of d'Estaing was sym-bolically related to his contribution to fur-thering the process of European integrationsduring his seven-year term as president ofFrance.

The time d'Estaing spent at the helm ofthe French state (1974-1981) was a particu-larly fertile period in terms of strengtheningthe idea of closer integration of Europeancountries, supported by an even strongerFrench-German alliance, which is often con-sidered the engine of European integrations.Together with his close friend, German chan-cellor Helmut Schmidt (1972-1982),d'Estaing succeeded in promoting a numberof important initiatives that furtheredEuropean unity.

The 1974 Summit in Paris, for instance,yielded the idea of regular meetings of theheads of states and governments of EU, andwas later institutionalised as the EuropeanCouncil which today is one of the mostimportant bodies in the EU, in charge of for-mulating general political guidelines for EUpolicies.

In the same year, the member statesagreed to hold first direct popular electionsfor the European Parliament (the electionstook place in 1979), and in 1978 d'Estaingand Schmidt formulated a joint proposal forthe establishment of European MonetaryUnion (EMU). In the same period the secondenlargement in the history of the Communitytook place, with Greece joining as its tenth

member.The appointment of d'Estaing as the

Chairman of the Convention embodied thedesire of the European Council to entrust themaking of the EU Constitution to someonewhose political engagement contributedgreatly to the integration of the Western partof the European continent and bringing theidea of a united Europe as a common inter-est of all states closer to the hearts of its cit-izens.

In addition to its Chairman and twoVice-Chairmen, the Convention was com-posed of: - 15 representatives of the Heads of State or

Government of the Member States (onefrom each Member State),

- 13 representatives of the Heads of State orGovernment of the candidate States (1 percandidate State),

- 30 representatives of the national parlia-ments of the Member States (two fromeach Member State),

- 26 representatives of the national parlia-ments of the candidate States (two from

by Vladimir Pavi}evi}

DDiissccuussssiioonn aabboouutt ddeemmooccrraaccyy iinn tthhee EEUU sshheeddss ssppeecciiaall lliigghhtt oonn tthheeooppppoorrttuunniittiieess ffoorr iinnccrreeaassiinngg tthhee ddeemmooccrraattiicc lleeggiittiimmaaccyy ooff tthhee eexxiisstt-iinngg iinnssttiittuuttiioonnss

AAlltthhoouugghh tthhee lleeaaddeerrss ooff tthhee EEUU mmeemmbbeerr ssttaatteess aaggrreeeedd oonn aannddssiiggnneedd tthhee tteexxtt ooff tthhee TTrreeaattyy EEssttaabblliisshhiinngg aa CCoonnssttiittuuttiioonn ffoorr EEuurrooppeeiinn OOccttoobbeerr 22000044 iinn RRoommee,, tthhiiss ddooccuummeenntt ddiidd nnoott rreeppllaaccee tthheeffoouunnddiinngg ttrreeaattiieess tthhaatt ssttiillll rreegguullaattee tthhee ffuunnccttiioonniinngg ooff EEUU

Gspn!uif!Jefb!pg!Fvspqf!up!b!Dpotujuvujpo!gps!Fvspqf////////

11Eu r op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9Po l i c y

each candidate State),- 16 members of the European Parliament,- 2 representatives of the European

Commission.

Work of the ConventionThe work of the Convention on drafting

EU constitution comprised three phases:- Identifying expectations - consists of broad

discussions on the expectations and needsof the Member States, their Governmentsand Parliaments, and those of Europeansociety. In addition to the institutions exist-ing in the framework of EU member statesand candidate countries, as well as EUinstitutions, this phase saw active involve-ment of numerous organisations whose taskis to promote European values and createa European society. This phase ended atthe Summit in Seville, on 21 June 2002.

- Deliberation phase - an attempt to com-pare various opinions put forward onEuropean integrations, trying to make thesediverse approaches more coherent andassessment of their implications and conse-quences for the common future ofEuropean peoples. This phase lasted fromthe meeting in Seville until the last plena-ry session of the Convention which tookplace in autumn 2002.

- A proposing phase - the participants in thework of the Convention tried to forge aconsensus on the proposals to be submittedto the European Council for deliberationonce the Convention has completed itswork. This phase included analysis of costand benefits of different formulae based onwhich the process of European integrationscould be directed further, choosing the rightone and formulating the proposal of theConstitution accordingly. The proposingphase was completed in the spring of 2003at the summit of heads of states and gov-ernments of EU members in Thessaloniki.

Constitutional Treaty: What could havebeen different?

The decisions introduced in theDeclaration during the Laeken summit of EUleaders were an attempt to simplify the leg-islative apparatus of the EU and bring it clos-er to the citizens, and to strike a harmoniousbalance between different visions of thefuture development of the Union. TheConvention was supposed to, most impor-tantly, distribute and define responsibilitiesclearly and try to answer as precisely as pos-sible the question who does what?

This means, first of all, clearer divisionof competences between the EU and itsmember states, reorganising responsibilities inthe domain of foreign and security policy,and introducing mechanism that would reg-ulate the competition between the EU, states

and regions within the states regarding theirrespective roles in decision-making.

Parallel with this process the creators ofthe Constitution had to worry about simpli-fying the instruments the EU employs in theimplementation of its policies and adoptinglegislative acts. This means clearer definitionsof the basic categories used by the EU - reg-ulations, directives and decisions, or, as thedraft Constitution finally suggested, defining anew legal framework with new instruments.

The Laeken Declaration stressed theissues of democracy, transparency and effi-ciency of the entire process of Europeanintegrations, and found this was the biggestshortcoming of the EU, especially when bear-ing in mind the citizens' perceptions of it.Discussion about democracy in the EU shed

special light on the opportunities for increas-ing the democratic legitimacy of the existinginstitutions. The greatest criticism towards theBrussels administration was that they weretoo distant from the European citizens whodid not have the slightest access to thesebodies whose decisions directly affect theirbehaviour in many areas of life.

The draft of the Constitutional Treatyfrom 2003 envisaged abolition of the divisionof EU into three pillars, as was defined by theMaastricht Treaty and established EuropeanUnion, instead of European Communities, asthe relevant international and legal subject.This would have meant a significant step fur-ther in the deepening of the process ofEuropean integrations. In addition to these

changes, the Convention proposed establish-ment of the institution of President of theEuropean Union, as well as Foreign AffairsMinister.

Although the leaders of the EU memberstates agreed on and signed the text of theTreaty Establishing a Constitution for Europein October 2004 in Rome, this document didnot replace the founding treaties that still reg-ulate the functioning of EU. Changing thecontent of the founding treaties or adoptinga new treaty requires ratification of the newdocument by the legislatures of each mem-ber state. In some countries, this act was pre-ceded by a plebiscite on the issue, in orderto secure the acquiescence of the citizens.After a majority of citizens of the Netherlandsand France voted against the new treaty, theprocess of ratification was frozen and the EUcontinued to function based on the existingfoundational treaties.

European identityAn EU constitution was also supposed to

foster the development of European identity,which is a topic that inspired many scientificworks at universities across the EU and the US.

A Constitution would facilitate citizens'perception that it is possible to relate to mul-tiple identities at the same time. This meansthat if someone feels deep belonging to hisor her region he or she can also at the sametime identify with the whole nation. Whetherthe person identifies with one or the otherwill thus vary with circumstances on the cir-cumstances.

As observed by Thomas Risse, individu-als posses multiple identities. Inhabitants ofthe Westfalen region in Germany can at thesame time feel that they belong to their city,

region or the state of which they are the cit-izens - in this case, Germany. Which identi-ty will the person consider most importantdepends on the context. When a personfrom Westfalen travels to France he or she ismost likely to feel German, whereas the pre-vailing identity on a trip to South Americawill probably be - European.

The European Constitution was supposedto create the framework within which belong-ing to different entities will be perfectly natu-ral for all those who understand that living inEurope today means living in a politically andculturally vibrant and diverse environment.

The author is teaching at the Faculty ofPolitical Sciences of the University of Belgrade

TThhee EEuurrooppeeaann CCoonnssttiittuuttiioonn wwaass ssuuppppoosseedd ttoo ccrreeaattee tthhee ffrraammeewwoorrkkwwiitthhiinn wwhhiicchh bbeelloonnggiinngg ttoo ddiiffffeerreenntt eennttiittiieess wwiillll bbee ppeerrffeeccttllyy nnaattuu-rraall ffoorr aallll tthhoossee wwhhoo uunnddeerrssttaanndd tthhaatt lliivviinngg iinn EEuurrooppee ttooddaayy mmeeaannsslliivviinngg iinn aa ppoolliittiiccaallllyy aanndd ccuullttuurraallllyy vviibbrraanntt aanndd ddiivveerrssee eennvviirroonnmmeenntt

12Eu r op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9Eur op ean ba r ome t e r i n Mon t en eg r o

CrisisCrisis is a joker card. Nobody is yet taking it very seri-

ously, which is why they will be tryinghard to explain to us all the far-reach-ing horrors it will bring. One greatthing is that at least we changed thekeyword. Once upon a time integra-tions, recently application and nowa-days - crisis.

That's the culprit and explanationwhy our application is not breakinginto full gallop but rather proceeding atthat subtle trot that some malicioussouls would even call a blockade.Blockade or not, all of us who actual-ly wanted to find out what happenedwith the historical piece of rolledparchment that we handed over toSSaarrkkoozzyy NNiicchhoollaass suffered terribly inthe last few days.

The whole of the state fleetgrabbed the rows and set out on acruise across all media branches todeny an announcement of oneEuropean news agency. The application

is not blocked. That's a harsh word.This is simply not true, it just needs theagreement of all 27 countries. And allthese countries, you're guessing, are inthe midst of an economic crisis andcouldn't care less for the enlargement.Their politicians are interested in satis-fying their voters so that they willextend their mandates in order for thepoliticians to extend their noble visions.Then comes the message from gentle-manly OOllllii RReehhnn, the man who nevergiggles schizophrenically like some ofhis other colleagues from Brussels. He

guarantees that the crisis will not affectthe enlargement. It's the CzechPresidency, after all, and the Czechsare known to have a thing for our sea-side. The situation is just getting toocomplicated since the game moved tothe foreign terrain and our media don'thave correspondents in Brussels.

It will be, by the way, a historicalmoment when the first Montenegrin

journalist lands in some tiny apartmentin Brussels on the expense of the com-pany and begins reporting from thespot. Until then, we will have to relyon dodgy European agencies which thestate owned media can't trust, becausethey're financed from the budget. Andthe budget's on trial. Because of thecrisis.

There's no crisisFor Montenegrin authorities, times

have never been better. They get a new opponent every

day. The opposition multiplies throughsimple division, without much eroti-cism. From the darkness of the ninetiesthe forgotten faces of one time aces ofidiotic ideologies are rejoining theranks. The only question left is howmuch money will be spent on thefinancing of these farcical party splin-ters and reappearances of politicalMethuselahs that will together makethis campaign unworthy of participa-tion. Never was activism inMontenegro so meaningless, and thegood old custom of abstinence morejustified. In any case, the economicprogrammes and political visions areout. The winner is known in advancebecause one of the competitors decid-ed to commit suicide before the fate-ful battle. On the other hand, the gov-ernment is polishing up the make-upand cutting wages of the pudgy direc-tors of state-owned companies, whichis a pre-election sweetener like we'venever seen before. There, someprogress is obvious. Not too long ago itwas enough to open a bridge some-where, but this, after all is a systemicparade of the alleged concern for pub-lic resources. Or what remains of them.

Our European prime ministerinstead of taking a study trip to Berlin,

by Brano Mandi}

TThhee wwhhoollee ooff tthhee ssttaattee fflleeeett iiss ccrruuiissiinngg vveerryy mmeeddiiaa bbrraanncchh ttoo ddeennyytthhee aannnnoouunncceemmeenntt ooff oonnee EEuurrooppeeaann nneewwss aaggeennccyy.. TThhee aapppplliiccaattiioonniiss nnoott bblloocckkeedd.. TThhaatt''ss aa hhaarrsshh wwoorrdd.. TThhiiss iiss ssiimmppllyy nnoott ttrruuee,, iitt jjuussttnneeeeddss tthhee aaggrreeeemmeenntt ooff aallll 2277 ccoouunnttrriieess.. AAnndd aallll tthheessee ccoouunnttrriieess,,yyoouu''rree gguueessssiinngg,, aarree iinn tthhee mmiiddsstt ooff aann eeccoonnoommiicc ccrriissiiss aanndd ccoouulldd-nn''tt ccaarree lleessss ffoorr tthhee eennllaarrggeemmeenntt

Gspn!bqqmjdbujpo!up!hpbu!difftf

13Eu r op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9Eur op ean ba r ome t e r i n Mon t en eg r o

Paris or Oslo, decided forQuatar and the United ArabEmirates. Nobody has a cluehow much money is involvedor takes seriously the fact thatthe Arab business cut down itsinvestments by 60%. Becauseof the crisis. For our primeminister, however, there is nocrisis, and he's going to negoti-ate with sultans and sheiks.

Interestingly enough, theprime minister didn't bring thepublic service along to hishaiduk gatherings. RTCG jour-nalists have every right to feelbitter. They've travelled thewhole of Europe, and justwhen they get a chance to visitthe cradle of civilisations -zilch. Arabs don't like cameras,that's the only way I can solvethis aporim.

WorkersThe workers striking in

front of the Government are so boring.They come in small groups and causeno incidents and they bring idiotic slo-gans like "Bread, bread, master!"instead of coming in batches of a fewthousand, each with an egg or a toma-to to throw at the Government andthen back home. Return the next daywith water melons, and so on. Simply,they have to try out different combattactics. Like this, without a strategy,without a cent in their pockets, it'sawful to see these people nobody caresabout. The least the opposition whichnow has better things to do. The gov-ernment knows it well and isn't goingto pick up the workers' trail. The trailcould lead journalists to some interest-ing discoveries, but nobody has timefor petty thefts in state-owned compa-nies, that immortal genre.

Idlers Loafers are set to profit these days,

like they do ahead of every elections. Publish analysis, expound on syn-

theses. Organise the propagandaunderground in order to swell better

political results. Special analysts' unitswill hover on the relation bar-universi-ty-bar in order to explain to the plebsand the professors the winning politicalprogramme.

As we said before, there are no

programmes, and no programmaticpolicy either. Everything comes downto a few formulas forged overnight byparty ideologues. The market will onlyopen up after the elections when per-haps we will even get some historicalcoalition for national reconciliation. Allin all, the progress is obvious, this timeall the masks are down. Nobody in thiscountry has any clue about the mostburning economic problems and webehave and observe the situation inKAP accordingly. Until yesterday, wehad a flexible system. Now we are partof a big system and we'll have a reces-sion. When your minister of financetells you two such stories in twomonths, the public opinion must be so

underestimated and dead thatthe government deserves everyadmiration.

It's great to live in a coun-try like that. Nobody is expectedto ask any concrete questions orgive concrete answers. Instead,we are dumbly following politi-cal shows where idiots ask otheridiots questions. Only a firm sys-tem of accountability couldmake these into useful people,but as we don't have such a sys-tem neither in the media nor inthe parties nor in our own work-places, mostly... everybody isentitled to being the smartest.And if he or she has a bit of tal-ent for marketing, there we havea weekend messiah or a fiercedissident.

That's why I like to dreamof a house in a village, longbeard, a herd of goats and abunch of healthy children withrosy cheeks. If possible, the min-

istry of agriculture could easily arrangefor one sharp pen and a great threat tothe government to disappear forever ata minimum cost somewhere on thestretch Mu`evice-Gornja Trep~a, on

the road to Trubjela, twenty kilometersor so from Nik{i} and its mayor.

The answer to the question: wouldyou prefer to have an influence on theMontenegrin public opinion or to pro-duce goat cheese - is clear. The noble,neglected stone houses inMontenegro's neverlands are waitingfor us and they're a prefect way toescape forever... But they're not theonly way. You can also start working inpolitics. Carefully study the acquiscommunautaire or the proceedings ofMontenegro's secret police.

The life is full of opportunities.

The author is a journalist of thedaily newspaper "Vijesti"

FFoorr MMoonntteenneeggrriinn aauutthhoorriittiieess,, ttiimmeess hhaavvee nneevveerr bbeeeenn bbeetttteerr.. TThheeyyggeett aa nneeww ooppppoonneenntt eevveerryy ddaayy.. TThhee ooppppoossiittiioonn mmuullttiipplliieess tthhrroouugghhssiimmppllee ddiivviissiioonn,, ssoo tthheerree''ss lliittttllee eerroottiicciissmm ttoo ssppeeaakk ooff

Thanks primarilyto the writing of

the daily Vijesti,the public learnedabout a series offacts related to thepolicy and practiceof rewarding public

officials from the ruling parties who happento be directors, presidents and members ofthe boards of managers of public enterpris-es and enterprises in which the Governmenthas majority ownership.

First the State Audit institutions found,in its "Audit Report on the FinancialStatements of the Railways of Montenegro for2007", that the Assembly of shareholdersapproved in 2005 payment of 18 grosswages to the president of the Board ofDirectors after the expiry of his or her term.

Railways of Montenegro is a companythat at the end of 2007 fiscal year had 104.5million euro losses. The management thatcame to the helm of the company two yearsago "finished" its mandate in mid-summerlast year, by distributing severance pays.President of the Board of Directors received120 000 euros, and other members got 25000 each. The next President of the Boardof Directors after only half a year of workingfor the Railways got 180 000 euros, whilethe old-new members of the Board receivedeach 45 000.

In another company controlled by theGovernment - Coal Mine "Pljevlja" - a for-mer president of the Board of Directors andMP of the Democratic Party of Socialists(DPS) received around 58 000 euros, andanother MP and port-parole of DPS 40 000.

In December 2008, net average wagein Montenegro was 443 euros. The basic,officially reported net salary of a minister inthe Government of Montenegro is between700 and 1 100 euros. President ofMontenegro earns over 1000 euros permonth. Severance pays for some 8 000workers, so-called "victims of transition" inthe period 2000-2008 distributed by thegovernment in late 2008 and early 2009

amount to 1 926 euros per person. Directors, presidents and members of

the management boards (boards of directors)of public enterprises owned by the Republicof Montenegro are also entitled to numerousprivileges - salaries, per diem travel expens-es, covered expenses of their official mobilephones, use of the company vehicles (withcovered gas expenses), severance pays, costsof representation (restaurants etc.), businesscredit cards with a certain limit and others.According to the publicly available informa-tion, salaries of the presidents and membersof the boards of directors in public enterpris-es range from 800 to 3 000 euros. Salariesof the directors of public enterprises can beup to 4 000 euros. Nearly all members of themanagement of these companies are alsomembers of the main boards of the rulingparties - DPS and SDP.

In spite of the leagues of experts avail-able to it in the country, and even within theruling parties, the Government insists onappointing appoint to the management of its

enterprises only a handful of the highestparty officials, for several mandates on thesame boards, and until recently even in sev-eral companies at the same time. After theycomplete one mandate in an enterprise theygo to replace other members of the boardsof another enterprise, which often operatesin an entirely different branch of business.

What is really a "severance pay" and isit possible for someone to legally receivesuch a huge amount of money?

The labour code prescribes that "anemployee that has been declared redundantand is not being transferred to other taskswith the same employer in line with his orher qualifications, full or part time; and is notbeing transferred to another employer in linewith his or her qualifications, full or parttime; and is not subject to further training orretraining for another job with the same orother employer or other measures in accor-dance with the collective agreement or the

employment contract, is entitled to a sever-ance pay from his or her current employeramounting to a minimum of six averagewages in Montenegro".

Secretary general of the Association ofFree Trade Unions SSrr||aa KKeekkoovvii}} correctlyobserves that "the purpose of the severancepay is to provide the employee with someincome in the period until he or she is ableto secure another job. In other words, inorder to be entitled to the severance pay thedirectors must first be declared redundant,i.e. his or her employment must be terminat-ed". This is obviously not the case, and themotives for distributing severance pays arevery different.

The intention of the Government andthe ruling parties was, among other, to assisttheir loyal cadre in "improving" their livingstandards by allocating them to the leadingpositions in important public companies. MPDD`̀aavviidd [[aabboovvii}} (SDP) confirms this conclu-sion when he claims that "if MPs in theParliament had decent wages, they would

not have to seek additional jobs". Minister ofInterior and Public Administration JJuussuuffKKaallaammppeerroovvii}} (member of SDP presidency)said for TV Vijesti that "while he was amember of the management of MontenegroAirlines, he gave one third of his salary to hisparty (SDP), since this was the internal partyregulation". Director of DPS also admitted tothe media that their cadres are obliged totransfer 10% of their incomes to the partycoffers.

Once this topic raised some dust in themedia, the Government of Montenegro firststudied the "Information on severance pays inthe Railways of Montenegro" and concludedthat all members of the Board of Directorsshould return severance payments theyreceived on the basis of the decision of theassembly of shareholders of this company.However, the Government also found that ithad no means of forcing anybody to returnthe money, and while some yielded under

14Eur op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9Po l i c i e s i n f o cu s

S T A T E O W N E D E N T E R P R I S E S I N M O N T E N E G R O - P U B L I C M O N E Y F O R P E R S O N A LA N D P A R T Y N E E D S

IInn DDeecceemmbbeerr 22000088,, nneett aavveerraaggee wwaaggee iinn MMoonntteenneeggrroo wwaass 444433eeuurrooss.. TThhee bbaassiicc,, ooffffiicciiaallllyy rreeppoorrtteedd nneett ssaallaarryy ooff aa mmiinniisstteerr iinn tthheeGGoovveerrnnmmeenntt ooff MMoonntteenneeggrroo iiss bbeettwweeeenn 770000 aanndd 11 110000 eeuurrooss..PPrreessiiddeenntt ooff MMoonntteenneeggrroo eeaarrnnss oovveerr 11000000 eeuurrooss ppeerr mmoonntthh..SSeevveerraannccee ppaayyss ffoorr ssoommee 88 000000 wwoorrkkeerrss,, ssoo-ccaalllleedd ""vviiccttiimmss ooff ttrraann-ssiittiioonn"" iinn tthhee ppeerriioodd 22000000-22000088 ddiissttrriibbuutteedd bbyy tthhee ggoovveerrnnmmeenntt iinnllaattee 22000088 aanndd eeaarrllyy 22000099 aammoouunntt ttoo 11 992266 eeuurrooss ppeerr ppeerrssoonn

by Stevo Muk

////////Tfwfsbodf!qbzt!ps!qbsuz!efdpsbujpot

15Eu r op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9Po l i c i e s i n f o cu s

public pressure and returned the payments,others simply ignored Governments' recom-mendation and some even categoricallyrefused to do so. Soon after, the Governmentalso established a working group whose taskwas to reevaluate the policy of severancepayments and compensations in publicenterprises.

It is evident that the practice of exorbi-tantly high salaries and other compensationsfor directors and managers of state ownedenterprises dates back for decades inMontenegro. In June 1996 the media report-ed that "in unregulated environments, like itis the case with Montenegro in the processof transformations, management positions inpublic companies become very attractive.One should not, however, disregard thematerial aspects. Membership in the man-agement boards became, for those who canget hold of it, a very solid source of income.There is no law or regulation that wouldclearly prescribe compensation rates for themanagement, except for the general recom-mendation of the Government ofMontenegro that such work should be remu-nerated".

Causes of such perennial tendencies liein the lack of clear legal procedures and reg-ulations that would limit the policy and prac-tice of exorbitant incomes and in the lack ofsanctions for such decisions; in the absence

of a responsible, rational and ethical handlingof public resources, and in the lack of polit-ical accountability for such behavior.

The Government behaves as if it werea few isolated cases and recent practices andproclaims its intent to quickly eradicate it. Itsreport also deals with establishing more real-istic maximum salaries for directors andmanagement.

However, instead of commissions,working groups and reports, there are clearindications that this may be a matter forcourts and that a series of criminal acts andviolations of different laws have occurred. Itshould be the task of the Police Authorityand State Prosecutor to establish whether thedecisions and actions taken in these casesamount to criminal acts.

In addition to this, labour inspectorsshould conduct necessary investigations inorder to establish whether such decisions onthe part of the shareholders' assemblies,boards of managers and boards of directorshave violated the Labour Code and under-take certain measures accordingly.

Overall, the state ought to take a moreradical stance towards public enterprises and

enterprises where it has majority ownership.The new policy would include not only anew law on public enterprises but also aclear ethical codex for the government rep-resentatives in all bodies an organisationswhere they represent and guarantee imple-mentation of the Government' policies.

As for the transparency of their work,annual reports of all economic subjects, theirstatutes and other general acts of the com-panies in majority state ownership ought tobe available via Internet, as well as the pol-icy of remunerating directors, members of

various boards as well as other management.The Government should define a clear, trans-parent policy of rewards and bonuses for thesuccessful, profitable companies in its owner-ship. Such a policy must be related to objec-tive criteria of business development, a sub-stantiated link between decisions and resultsand directed primarily at the management,not at directors. A policy like that would onlyapply to those companies that participate in

the market competition.Unfortunately, Montenegro's Constitu-

tion fails to define the office of an MP asprofessional employment and thus incompat-ible with other public jobs, i.e. positions,especially such demanding jobs as should becreating business policy for the companieswhere the state is a majority owner and pub-

lic interest is paramount. There may be otherways to professionalise management of pub-lic companies, either through amendments tothe Law on the Prevention of Conflict ofInterests, which unfortunately supports theoption of an MP's membership in one board,or by adopting a moral codex for MPs or viagovernment decree that would define thecriteria for persons who may be appointed tothe managing boards of public companies onbehalf of the state.

State Audit Institution (SAI) should con-tinue with regular audit of public companiesand companies with majority or substantialownership by the state. To date, such finan-cial audits have been an exception. Thecompanies should be obliged to provide atimely response to SAI's recommendationsand make the reports on the implementationof these recommendations public.

Commission for the Conflict of Interestswill have to answer why there is no informa-tion on income and property of a number ofpresidents or members of managing boardsappointed by the Government ofMontenegro on its website, and take ade-quate measures to ensure respect of the law.

Until then, the protection of publicinterest will remain obscured by party andpersonal interests, which is never a guaran-tee of societal progress, in spite of allattempts to find excuses.

The author is the president of the Boardof Directors of the Institute Alternative (IA)

WWhhaatt iiss rreeaallllyy aa ""sseevveerraannccee ppaayy"" aanndd iiss iitt ppoossssiibbllee tthhaatt ssoommeeoonneeccaann lleeggaallllyy rreecceeiivvee ssuucchh aann eennoorrmmoouuss aammoouunntt ooff mmoonneeyy??

IInnsstteeaadd ooff ccoommmmiissssiioonnss,, wwoorrkkiinngg ggrroouuppss aanndd rreeppoorrttss,, tthheerree aarreecclleeaarr iinnddiiccaattiioonnss tthhaatt tthhiiss mmaayy bbee aa mmaatttteerr ffoorr ccoouurrttss aanndd tthhaatt aasseerriieess ooff ccrriimmiinnaall aaccttss aanndd vviioollaattiioonnss ooff ddiiffffeerreenntt llaawwss hhaavveeooccccuurrrreedd.. IItt sshhoouulldd bbee tthhee ttaasskk ooff tthhee PPoolliiccee AAuutthhoorriittyy aanndd SSttaatteePPrroosseeccuuttoorr ttoo eessttaabblliisshh wwhheetthheerr tthhee ddeecciissiioonnss aanndd aaccttiioonnss ttaakkeenn iinntthheessee ccaasseess aammoouunntt ttoo ccrriimmiinnaall aaccttss

16Eur op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9F r om my p o in t o f v i ew

W H Y D O I W A N T T O B E A C I T I Z E N O F E U R O P E A N U N I O N

In order not torepeat themotives listedhere by myesteemed col-leagues in theprevious issues,

because I believe them to be entirelyworthwhile, I will focus on one differ-ent reason for which I want to be acitizen of EU.

I say "one", which means that I,like so many of us from the civic sec-tor who work hard and learn continu-ously, in spite of unstable and ofteninsufficient income, chronic lack of anyleisure time and sleep, lack of privacyand excess of responsibility, have cer-tain broader expectations from EUaccession.

I have also learned, however, andfrom personal experience, that greatexpectations can cause even greaterdisappointments, and such causal rela-tion is not something that should bepracticed often, for the sake of one'sown health.

Now back to the topic Iintroduced.

The motive I want to talkabout is the achievement of ahigh degree of civic, as well asenvironmental awareness in indi-viduals.

Whether it's because of dailyexposure at work, which withtime, no matter how hard I try toavoid it, lowers my tolerance andproduces temporary saturation, orbecause of my meetings with col-leagues from the EU who bringthe opportunity of cultural dia-logue and advance of my ownknowledge, I reel more and more

the need to run away from the "livingtruths" of corridor rumours, conspiracytheories and petty interests, the phe-nomena that in my mind are directlyconnected to the lack of civic courageand culture in the environment whereI live and work.

I cannot but notice that as long aswe're better acquainted with partyprogrammes than with human rights,know more politicians than scientistsand our families watch more of the TVDuga and live broadcasts of theParliament sessions than NationalGeographic or Discovery, as long asgarbage bags are treated as a potentialprecipitation and betting is the mostwidespread hobby, as long as drugaddiction is on the rise and corruptionis a widely accepted and acceptablephenomenon etc. we can hardly speakof civic awareness and expect it toflourish.

Distance from the goal, at least inmy case, is correlated with the extentof desire, and since dealing with envi-ronmental issues taught me the spiritof a marathon runner, I will try topresent a little more cheerfully all thereasons for which every one of usshould think of activities that couldpositively influence the development

of civic and environmental awarenessin our country.

If we're creative enough, maybewe can come up with a NationalStrategy of Development o Civic andEnvironmental Conscience for theperiod 2009-2020 (!?). The moneywill come, naturally, exclusively fromforeign donations. An example thatlocal intelligence can replace foreignconsultants. And the capital would stayin Montenegro. Anything is possible.

Well, Don Quixote fought withthe windmills, which are nowdaysused to produce energy from renew-able sources. Finally, perhaps theexperiences of the ruling parties in"dealing" and "figuring out", whichoften smell of corruption, if afavourable opportunity arises, willserve to reverse the situation andaccelerate the rest of the EU accessionprocess, without extra payment tovarious lobbying firms.

Then we will certainly have plen-ty of reasons to develop a civic con-scious.

In the EU, that's the cheaperoption.

If we are aiming to accomplish animportant goal, which civic awarenesscertainly is, visa liberalisation, oppor-

tunities for travel and hopefullythe rise of living standards will notbe the only benefits from joiningthe EU.

I hope that our Europeanvision and Sisyphus' mission willone day be successfully accom-plished and that the fulfilment ofthis dream will bring us all person-al and professional satisfaction.

And sustainable developmentas a genuine societal choice.

The author is the director ofcivic association "OZON" fromNik{i}. He attended VIII generationof European Integration School

by Aleksandar Perovi}

////////Djwjd!boe!fowjsponfoubm

17Eu r op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9O f f t h e w i r e

European TV channel Euronews, basedin Lyon, France, is the most popular

news channel in 17 EU countries as wellas in Norway, Russia and Switzerland.

According to the European Mediaand Marketing Survey, in the last winterseason Euronews' market share was 17.5%,or eight million viewers.

Next on the ranking of most popularnews channels are CNN with 15.8%,SkyNews with 14.6% and BBC with 12.4%.The least watched are Al Jazeera with2.4% and the French information channelFrance 24 - 2.2%.

While the share of European televi-sion networks remains unchanged, CNN'spopularity dropped by 400 000 viewers,ranking Euronews ahead of the CNN forthe first time in history.

Euronews was founded in 1993, and

it broadcasts news 24 hours a day inFrench, English, German, Spanish, Italian,Portuguese and Arabic.

Its program is currently available viacable and satellite to 200 million house-holds in 130 states.

MMiill ll iioonnss ooffwwoorrkkeerrss ttoolloossee jjoobbss

Up to 3.5 million EU citizens couldlose their jobs in 2009 because of

the economic downturn, warns EuropeanCommission.

The first EC monthly report on thelabour market states that unemploymentin EU-27 may jump from 7% in 2008 toalmost 10% in late 2010.

The crisis will have the greatestimpact on metalworking, automobile,financial and logistic sectors in which some100 000 workers were already laid offonly in the last quarter of 2008.

TTuurrkkeeyy rreeaaddyy ffoorr EEUU bbyy 22001133

Turkey will be ready to join EU by 2013,announced Ali Babacan, Turkish foreign

affairs minister at his recent visit to Riga."Turkey will be ready by 2013 but

we still do not know whether the EU willbe ready as well", Babacan said.

Ankara began its accession negotia-tions with EU in October 2005. So far ithas opened ten chapters, and preliminarilyclosed one.

Since December 2006 eight of thesechapters are suspended until Turkey mod-ifies its position on Cyprus.

SSlloovveenniiaannss ddoonn''ttwwaanntt CCrrooaatt iiaa iinn

tthhee EEUUIf the citizens of Slovenia were to decideon Croatia's accession to EU in a referen-

dum, the result would be defeating.According to the poll published by Delofrom Ljubljana, 49.7% would vote against it.

Croatia's accession to EU would besupported by 32.7% of Slovenians.

SSttoopp ttoo ppiirraaccyyPolish police announced it had cut the

biggest chain for the production ofpirated CDs and DVDs in the EU andclosed down two factories in Warsaw andRybnik (south of Poland) where the newestfilms were printed only a day after theirEuropean premiere.

The speaker of the Warsaw policeMarin Szyndler said they had confiscated54 000 fakes worth 5 million zloty, ormore than a million euros.

Fvspofxt!uif!nptu!qpqvmbs

The Czechs just lost the primacy theywere very proud of in the past - of

being the biggest atheists in Europe.The latest Gallup poll shows that in

Europe the biggest non-believers areEstonians. Among the nations where thereligion holds an important place thechampions are Romanians (78%) togetherwith Italians, Portuguese and Greeks, close-ly followed by Poles where 72% of respon-dents stated religion was important in their

everyday life.The Gallup pollsters asked citizens in

143 countries of the world to rank theimportance of religious beliefs for their every-day life. Among the 10 countries where Godis least important for people, 7 are European.

The biggest atheists are Estonians,where the importance of God and religionis recognised by only 14% of the respon-dents, followed by Swedes (17%), Danes(18%) and Czechs (21%).

Fvspqfbot!epo(u!cfmjfwf!jo!Hpe

Video games can be good for childrenand stimulate their creativity, concludes

the report of the European Parliament

Committee for Single Market andConsumer Protection. The reports statesthat there is no direct connection betweenvideo games and violent behaviour, butadmits that violence in some of the gamesmay "stimulate" such behaviour in children.

The report did not impose any bans,but it called on the EU member states tostrengthen the voluntary codex of rating thegames according to their content (PEGI).

The total revenue of the video gamesindustry last year was more than 7 billioneuros. The report contradicts the commonbelief that video games are directed main-ly at children, with statistics showing thatthe average wage of the players is 33.

Wjefp!hbnft!gps!dsfbujwjuz

18Eur op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9EU cha l l eng e s

As electricity and gas markets slow-ly open up to competition, EU

countries with fixed pricing policiesare coming under growing pressure tolet market forces decide prices. Butopponents point to the potentiallyhigh social consequences of the meas-ure.

By liberalising energy markets, EUcountries have started to introducepolicies aimed at encouraging newoperators to enter the market andcompete to offer gas and electricity tocustomers at the best price.

However, these markets remainfar from perfect markets from eco-nomics textbooks, mainly because theliberalisation process is incomplete.Moreover, pricing remains a highlysensitive issue, as it affects bothhouseholds and industrial consumers.

At the same time, climate changepolicy is crawling to the top of the EUagenda, making 'decarbonisation' ofthe energy sector a top political prior-ity. Low-carbon technologies, howev-er, come at a higher price than con-ventional fuels such as coal or gas.

Moreover, as energy consumersalso happen to be citizens and voters,the issue of energy pricing is making acomeback at the forefront of the polit-ical stage.

In many EU countries, the stateretains control over electricity and gasprices charged to end-users. In mostcases, these policies were decidedupon to shield households and indus-tries from violent price swings andkeep energy affordable.

But with liberalisation, regulated

prices and market prices still co-existin many countries, creating confusionfor customers and uncertainty forbusinesses wishing to break into

national energy markets.According to one European

Commission communication, pricecontrols "may be needed to protect

consumers in certain specific circum-stances, for instance in the transitionperiod towards effective competition"on the liberalised gas and electricitymarkets. However, it adds that they"must be balanced so as not to pre-vent market opening, create discrimi-nations among EU energy suppliers,

reinforce distortions of competition orrestrict resale".

According to a survey by theEuropean Group of Energy Regulators(ERGEG), which acts as an advisorybody to the European Commission, 17EU member states are currently apply-ing regulated tariffs for electricity andnine are doing the same for gas.Depending on the countries, fixedprices may cover such things as trans-port and distribution cost, taxes andlevies, and supply costs.

The regulated tariff does not nec-essarily apply to all customers. In theNetherlands and Denmark, forinstance, the state regulation only cov-ers households and small businesses,for example, leaving large industrialcustomers to buy their energy on theopen market. However, according tothe ERGEG study, where both systemsco-exist, 80% of end-users chose theregulated price, making genuine com-

petition on retail markets an elusiveobjective for now.

Advocates of liberalisation arguethat price setting is "one of the factorswhich hinder equal access of all sup-pliers to customers".

"New entrants who do not havepower generation capacities or longterm contracts buy energy on whole-sale markets," ERGEG points out. As aconsequence, "wholesale price levelsmust be lower" than the regulatedprice if they are to compete on theopen market.

However, market players are oftenunable to make competitive offers. InFrance, Spain, and to a lesser extentItaly, "the regulated tariffs are (…) setat a level so low compared with mar-ket prices that they fully prevent mar-

S H O U L D E N E R G Y P R I C E S B E R E G U L A T E D B Y T H E S T A T E S O R L E F T T O T H EM A R K E T

Fmfdusjdjuz!bt!b!qpmjujdbm!jttvf

EEuurrooppeeaannss ssppeenndd aann aavveerraaggee ooff 55..77%% ooff tthheeiirr hhoouusseehhoolldd bbuuddggeettssoonn eenneerrggyy,, wwiitthh eelleeccttrriicciittyy aaccccoouunnttiinngg ffoorr tthhee llaarrggeesstt ppaarrtt ooff tthhiisseexxppeennddiittuurree

AAss eenneerrggyy ccoonnssuummeerrss aarree nnoott oonnllyy bbuuyyeerrss bbuutt aallssoo cciittiizzeennss aanndd vvoott-eerrss,, tthhee iissssuuee ooff eenneerrggyy pprriicciinngg iiss mmaakkiinngg aa ccoommeebbaacckk aatt tthhee ffoorree-ffrroonntt ooff tthhee ppoolliittiiccaall ssttaaggee.. IInn mmaannyy EEUU ccoouunnttrriieess,, tthhee ssttaattee rreettaaiinnssccoonnttrrooll oovveerr eelleeccttrriicciittyy aanndd ggaass pprriicceess.. CCuurrrreennttllyy 1177 EEUU mmeemmbbeerrssaarree aappppllyyiinngg rreegguullaatteedd ttaarriiffffss ffoorr eelleeccttrriicciittyy aanndd 99 aarree ddooiinngg tthheessaammee ffoorr ggaass

19Eur op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9EU cha l l eng e s

ket opening," according to theCommission.

In the EU executive's view, elec-tricity and gas prices in those countries"do not reflect costs," leading to"under-investment" in new supplycapacity. Moreover, it says artificiallylow tariffs "impede real competition,"effectively blocking new suppliers'access to the market.

EFET, the European Federation ofEnergy Traders, is unambiguous: "Theregulated tariffs cannot anticipatevolatile wholesale prices" and thereforetend to "eradicate the only natural linkbetween the wholesale and retail mar-kets".

On the other side are those whobelieve that a "free market for energyprices" is itself a nonsense, since themarket itself is based on oligopolies.France offered distributing companiesa scheme allowing those that opted for

a market-based electricity tariff toswitch back to the regulated tariff fora period of two years. This provisionwas introduced because some compa-nies were nearing collapse in thecourse of the last rapid price hike ofoil, experiencing price rises of up to70% above the regulated tariff.

This is the main argument ofthose defending regulated tariffs - thatthey act as a cushion against wildprice swings when energy markets areaffected by external factors, such aspolitical instability in oil-producingregions.

The French authorities have alsopointed out that the price of electric-ity is naturally low in France becausethe costs of investment, notably innuclear power stations, have alreadybeen covered.

In addition to state regulations,the long-term contracts passedbetween industrial consumers of elec-tricity and large utility groups haveincreasingly attracted the attention ofthe European Commission. Electricitysuppliers often have difficulty breaking

into some national markets becauseindustrial consumers tend to buy theirelectricity on a long-term, exclusivebasis from their incumbent operator.

Supporters of long-term supplycontracts argue that they fulfil a usefulrole. For large industrial consumers,they offer more predictable prices thanthe open electricity market. In turn,long-term contracts reduce uncertain-ty for energy firms, allowing them toplan ahead and propose set tariffs fortheir clients.

But, according to theCommission, long-term contractsessentially hamper competition andprevent necessary price signals frombeing passed on to consumers. Whengas or electricity prices rise, consumersshould be encouraged to reduce theirconsumption, the argument goes.

A number of antitrust investiga-tions have also been launched in this

context. However, even the most ardent

supporters of liberalisation recognisethat competition should be matchedby measures to protect consumers.

In the UK, all the major energyutilities have introduced "social tariffs"to protect households from fuelpoverty. A Winter Fuel Allowancescheme was also introduced by the

government for the most vulnerablesectors of the British population, suchas the elderly. But these have beencriticised for failing to keep up withrising energy bills.

Moreover, clients who were noton the social scheme were sometimesoffered better deals when closing con-tracts over the Internet, causing theUK energy regulator to intervene andissue guidelines requiring energy com-panies to offer a social tariff whichmust equal the supplier's cheapestdeal.

With households still nervousabout changing electricity supplier, theEuropean Commission has decided tofocus another dimension of its policieson encouraging competition in theretail electricity sector.

In February 2009, it announcedthe launch of an investigation into the"malfunctioning" EU electricity mar-ket, following the publication of asurvey which revealed that the ener-gy sector was "underperforming" forconsumers. The probe will focus on"unfair" conditions for electricity con-sumers regarding billing, comparabil-ity of offers and unreasonable com-mercial practices, after the Com-mission found that "less than two

thirds of consumers are satisfied withtheir energy supplier".

In spite of that, the report revealsthat consumers are extremely unlikelyto switch gas or electricity supplier,with just seven and eight percentrespectively indicating their willingnessto do so.

According to the EuropeanCommission, this is a clear indicatorthat Europeans have a "limited" aware-ness of their rights as consumers.

V.[.-VV.@.

IInn tthhee NNeetthheerrllaannddss aanndd DDeennmmaarrkk tthhee ssttaattee rreegguullaattiioonn oonnllyy ccoovveerrsshhoouusseehhoollddss aanndd ssmmaallll bbuussiinneesssseess lleeaavviinngg llaarrggee iinndduussttrriiaall ccuussttoommeerrssttoo bbuuyy tthheeiirr eenneerrggyy oonn tthhee ooppeenn mmaarrkkeett

IInn tthhee UUKK,, aallll tthhee mmaajjoorr eenneerrggyy uuttiilliittiieess hhaavvee iinnttrroodduucceedd ""ssoocciiaallttaarriiffffss"" ttoo pprrootteecctt hhoouusseehhoollddss ffrroomm ffuueell ppoovveerrttyy

20Eur op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9Do cumen t s

Compiling answers to the EuropeanCommission questions and translating

them is a rather extensive and demand-ing task for Montenegro, and especiallyfor its public administration. It requirestimely and comprehensive preparationsin order to ensure that the entire publicadministration can be ready for theQuestionnaire, and supply precise, clearand concise answers within the duedeadlines.

So goes the text of the Brief on thepreparations for answering the Questio-nnaire adopted by the Government inlate January upon the proposal of theSecretariat for European Integrations (SEI).

The document emphasises that thepreparations should begin well inadvance in order to ensure smooth divi-sion of tasks and coordination across theministries, and stresses the amount ofthe translation needed as well as theimportance of information technologies(IT) in the sense of centralising the col-lection and processing of information.Secretariat provided the ministries andpublic institutions with the examples ofquestions and answers from theQuestionnaires of Macedonia andCroatia.

SEI is eager to stress the importanceof "timely preparation" for theQuestionnaire, pointing out that theanswers will be considered "a decisivestep in preparing for the negotiations forfull membership in the EU".

"Quality and correctness of theresponse will form the basis for all futurenegotiations and starting positions of bothsides", warns SEI.

The Government suggested thatemployees in the ministries and bodiesshould already start reading the Croatianand Macedonian Questionnaire andpreparing the answers.

"The Questionnaire is prepared sep-arately for every country, but some of thequestions are similar or the same forevery candidate country and some arecountry-specific. Comparing the experi-ences so far, we can notice that withevery wave of enlargement theQuestionnaires became more extensiveand more probing. Those for Macedoniaand Croatia were by far more detailed

and demanding than those for the previ-ous 12 applicants. If we compare theQuestionnaires for Croatia andMacedonia, which were received moreor less shortly one after the other, onecan see that almost 90% of the questionswere either the same or very similar.Bearing previous trends in mind, as wellas the time passed since the latestQuestionnaire, Montenegro can expect atleast 80% of the questions to be verysimilar to those received by Croatia andMacedonia", Government said.

It is also emphasised that in the caseof Croatia the translations of answers andannexes submitted in response to theQuestionnaire amounted to 7 000 pagesin Croatia, and as many as 14 000 pagesin the case of Macedonia.

"In the preparation period, andespecially later, in the period betweenreceiving the Questionnaire until allanswers are approved and adopted bythe Government and submitted to EC,this issue ought to be treated as the keynational priority", states the Brief.

Government already defined coordi-nation structures that will be responsiblefor the preparation of answers to theQuestionnaire. It is noted that part of theexisting coordination arrangements for theEuropean integrations process ought to be"updated, and linked to additional struc-tures and teams with precisely definedresponsibilities and competencies".

Cf!qsfdjtf-!dmfbs-!rvjdlW H A T I S W R I T T E N I N T H E G O V E R N M E N T ' S B R I E F O N T H E P R E P A R A T I O N S F O RA N S W E R I N G T H E Q U E S T I O N N A I R E

It is necessary to allocate the resources for translations and proofreading assoon as possible, since it is reasonable to expect around 10 000 pages oftranslation which, with the current costs of translation, will require some 160000 euros, states the Government's document.

On SEI's proposal, the government also approved the establishment of atranslation centre, judging that around 50 translators will be needed for theQuestionnaire.

The government recently created a draft Handbook for translating legal andother documents related to European integrations in order to avoid the diver-sity of translations among the government institutions.

1100 000000 PPAAGGEESS OOFF AANNSSWWEERRSS ,,116600 000000 EEUURROOSS FFOORR TTRRAANNSSLLAATTIIOONN

The government "recommended" public institutions not to give access to theEC Questionnaire and their answers to the media."The Questionnaire is the property of EC, which does not welcome their

appearance in public. We therefore recommend that this should be explainedto the national public and that all questions and answers should be made avail-able only once the process is completed, i.e. once the EC announces its opin-ion. Until that date, all information for the public should be focused on explain-ing the process, monitoring different phases of the process (translation of ques-tions, number/percentage of completed answers per week, translation ofanswers), on the preparedness of public administration, available equipment andstructural arrangements, general data (number of questions in total and per area,the basic drift of questions, without citing them) etc.", states the Brief.

HHIIDDIINNGG QQUUEESSTTIIOONNSS AANNDD AANNSSWWEERRSS

21Eu r op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9Do cumen t s

According to this document, deputyprime minister for European integrationswill be responsible for coordinating andleading the process of answering theQuestionnaire, in cooperation with SEIand through the Commission forEuropean Integrations.

"The ultimate responsibility for qual-ity, precise and timely response to theQuestionnaire, in line with the impor-tance of this activity, lies with theGovernment, which is the carrier of theprocess of Montenegro's integration inthe EU. The government ought toapprove and adopt every answer to theQuestionnaire before it can be submittedto the EC", states the document.

It adds that the "key (essential)responsibility and competence foranswering the Questionnaire belongs tothe ministries and other public adminis-tration bodies, who are in charge ofanswering every question and providingall necessary accompanying documents".

For the sake of greater efficiency theGovernment also decided to establishCommissions for verification of answers tothe Questionnaire, as well as an inter-ministerial body to be presided by thedeputy prime minister for European inte-grations and consisting of deputy primeministers for economic policy and forfinance, and ministers of foreign affairs,home affairs, justice, finance, economicdevelopment, agriculture, forestry andwaters, tourism and environment as wellas the SEI Secretary.

The Government appointed aresponsible minister (i.e. ministry) to eachof the 33 chapters of the Questionnairethat will, in the later phases of integra-tions, become negotiation chapters (seethe table).

As for political criteria, theGovernment appointed SEI as a coordi-nator, with assistance from the deputyprime minister for European integrations,and the following ministries in charge ofparticular areas: Ministry of Justice forDemocracy and Rule of Law, Ministry ofHuman and Minority Rights Protection -Human and Minority Rights and ForeignAffairs Ministry for Regional Issues andInternational Obligations.

As for the economic criteria, thecoordinator will be the Ministry ofFinance, with assistance of the deputyprime minister for economic policy andfinance.

VV..@@..

THE STRUCTURE OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE ANDCOORDINATORS OF CHAPTERSTTiittllee CCoooorrddiinnaattoorr

I1.2.3.

POLITICAL CRITERIADemocracy and the rule of law,Human rights and protection of minoritiesRegional issues and International Commitments

Deputy PM for EI - SEIMinistry of JusticeMinistry of Human and Minority Rights ProtectionMinistry of Foreign Affairs

II1.

1.1.1.2.1.3.1.4.1.5.2.

2.1.2.2.3.4.

5.

ECONOMIC CRITERIAExistence of a functioning market economyMacroeconomic stabilityPrice liberalisationFinancial sector PrivatisationMarket entry and exitLegal system and property rights-eeconomicissuesProperty rights Legal system from the economic standpointStructural reformsCapacity to cope with competitive pressuresand market forces within the UnionTrade integration

Ministry of Finance (with Deputy PMs forEconomic Policy and Finance)

III ABILITY TO TAKE ON THE OBLIGATIONSOF MEMBERSHIP - ACQUIS (33 CHAPTERS)

01 Free movement of goods Ministry for Economic Development02 Freedom of movement for workers Ministry of Health, Labour and Social Welfare

03 Right of establishment and freedom toprovide services

Ministry for Economic Development

04 Free movement of capital Ministry of Finance05 Public procurement Ministry of Finance06 Company law Ministry for Economic Development07 Intellectual property law Ministry for Economic Development08 Competition policy Ministry for Economic Development09 Financial services Ministry of Finance

10 Information society and media Ministry for Information Society/Ministry ofCulture, Sports and media

11 Agriculture and rural development Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management12 Food safety, veterinary and phytosanitary policy Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management

13 Fisheries Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management14 Transport policy Ministry Maritime Affairs, Transportation and

Telecommunication15 Energy Ministry for Economic Development16 Taxation Ministry of Finance17 Economic and monetary policy Ministry of Finance

18 Statistics Ministry of Finance /Monstat

19 Social policy and employment Ministry of Health, Labour and Social Welfare20 Enterprise and industrial policy Ministry for Economic Development21 Trans-European Networks Ministry Maritime Affairs, Transportation and

Telecommunication22 Regional policy and coordination of

structural instruments Secretariat for European Integrations

23 Judiciary and fundamental rights Ministry of Justice

24 Justice, freedom and security Ministry of Interior Affairs and Public Administration

25 Science and research Ministry of Education and Science26 Education and culture Ministry of Education and Science27 Environment Ministry of Tourism and Environmental Protection28 Consumer and health protection Ministry for Economic Development29 Customs union Ministry of Finance /Customs Administration30 External relations Ministry for Economic Development / Ministry of

Foreign Affairs31 Foreign, security, defence policy Ministry of Foreign Affairs

32 Financial control Ministry of Finance

33 Financial + budgetary provisions Ministry of Finance

22Eur op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9NGO a c t i v i t i e s / G e t t i ng a c qua in t e d w i t h Eur op ean Un i on

NON - GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS IN EUROPEAN UNION

EEUURROOPPEEAANNVVOOLLUUNNTTEEEERR

CCEENNTTRREE

The European Volunteer Centre is a Europeannetwork of currently 65 mainly national and

regional volunteer centres and volunteer devel-opment agencies across Europe.

Together with its members, the networkworks to support and promote voluntary activ-ity by enhancing the social, economic andpolitical foundations necessary for its furtheraffirmation.

The Centre channels the collective prior-ities and concerns of its member organisationsto the institutions of the European Union. It alsoacts as a central forum for the exchange of pol-icy, practice and information regarding volun-teering that may contribute to its affirmationinthe countries in which its members are active.

The vision of the European VolunteerCentre is a Europe in which volunteering is cen-tral in building a cohesive and inclusive societybased on solidarity and active citizenship. Itsmission is to create an enabling political, socialand economic environment in Europe for thefull potential of volunteering to be realized.

Objectives of the European VolunteerCentre are:- To promote and win recognition for volun-

teering as an expression of active citizenshipin Europe to the general public, the media,businesses and policy-makers on all relevantlevels of government

- To act as a bridge for communicationbetween volunteer organisations and the workof the European institutions

- To develop policies and promote and supportthe role of volunteering infrastructure inadvancing volunteering as an expression ofactive citizenship in Europe

- To serve as a knowledge and researchresource for volunteering in Europe

- To promote innovation and good practice inthe field of supporting and reinforcing volun-teering, participation and active citizenshipthrough exchange, structured dialogue andnetwork-building

- To develop strategic partnerships and allianceswith key stakeholders across all sectors

- To increase and diversify its membership - To maintain efficient management of the

organisation Together with its members, European

Volunteer Centre represents the voice of volun-teers in Europe, strengthens volunteering infra-structure and promotes volunteering making itmore effective.

More about this organisation can befound at: www.cev.be

Prepared by: Petar \UKANOVI]

TToo tthhee hheeaaddss ooff ssttaatteess aanndd ggoovveerrnnmmeennttss ooff tthhee EEUU ccoouunnttrriieess aanndd UUSSAA;;ttoo EEuurrooppeeaann UUnniioonn,, UUnniitteedd NNaattiioonnss,, CCoouunncciill ooff EEuurrooppee,, OOSSCCEE;;

ttoo iinntteerrnnaattiioonnaall oorrggaanniissaattiioonnss ffoorr tthhee pprrootteeccttiioonn ooff hhuummaann rriigghhttss aannddtthhee ggeenneerraall ppuubblliicc wwee ddiirreecctt tthhiiss

A P E A LWe urge all free citizens and the above institutions to support our appeal and expres-

sions of protest in the case of Professor Milan Popovi}.On the 25.02.2009, while he was lecturing at the University of Montenegro, Professor

Popovi} received the summons by the Supreme State Prosecutor to appear before theDepartment for the Fight against Organised Crime, Corruption, Terrorism and War Crimeswithin 48 hours because of his article Revolutionaries, published in the daily Vijesti.

In this article, Popovi} reiterated his earlier claims that in the case of Montenegro thereare serious indications not only that organised crime is closely related to some of the stateauthority structures, as noted in the reports by the European Commission, but that (quote)"organised crime is the state authority, led by the most powerful man in Montenegro, theoligarch, tycoon and prime minister Milo \ukanovi} and his clan" (end of quotation).

Popovi} was interrogated by the Supreme State Prosecutor although he is not part ofany criminal organisation or an insider that might poses operative evidence on organisedcrime and corruption which, according to the latest reports by the European Commissionand US State Department represent an obstacle to reforms and democratisation inMontenegro.

Professor Popovi} only repeated the well known evidence that suggests a certain linkbetween Milo \ukanovi} and his close collaborators and some of the heaviest crimes inthe recent Montenegrin history: from deportations of the Bosnian refugees and ethniccleansing in Bukovica to the smuggling of cigarettes and unresolved murders, to shady pri-vatisation deals and financial transactions. Prime Minister \ukanovi} was already interrogat-ed before foreign and national judicial authorities on account of several above accusations.Many of these cases were never processed before Montenegrin courts.

Montenegro has been suffering for years form a crisis of the rule of law: while numer-ous criminal cases remain unsolved, critically oriented individuals are constantly tried andinterrogated. The case of professor Popovi} , together with numerous processes against thejournalists, media, NGO activists and other political dissidents, as well as shadowing andwiretapping, is only another attempt to pressure and frighten those who point out the fatallink between the government, crime and corruption that has seized the Montenegrin state.

We urge you to condemn this violation of the right to free public speech and thus,at least symbolically, contribute to the conquest of freedom in Montenegro.

1. Bal{a Brkovi}, writer2. Dr Vjera Radovi} Begovi}, professor, University of Montenegro3. Vanja ]alovi}, executive director, NGO MANS4. Ervina Dabi`inovi}, peace and gender activist5. Goran \urovi}, executive director, NGO CDNGO6. @eljko Ivanovi}, executive director, daily Vijesti7. Jelena Jaukovi}, University of Montenegro8. Dr Svetozar Jovi}evi}, professor, University of Montenegro9. Dr Jelisaveta Kalezi}, professor, University of Montenegro10. Dr Filip Kova~evi}, professor, University of Montenegro11. Ljupka Kova~evi}, executive director, NGO ANIMA12. Esad Ko~an, editor in chief, weekly Monitor13. Milka Tadi} Mijovi}, executive director, weekly Monitor14. Stevo Muk, president of the board of directors, Institute Alternative15. Sne`ana Nik~evi}, journalist, RTCG16. Dr Miodrag Perovi}, professor, University of Montenegro17. Mom~ilo Radulovi}, secretary general, European Movement in Montenegro18. @arko Rak~evi}, entrepreneur19. Radmila Stojanovi}, activist and journalist20. Daliborka Uljarevi}, executive director, NGO CCE21. Dr Ilija Vujo{evi}, profesor, University of Montenegro22. Dragoljub Du{ko Vukovi}, journalist23. Aleksandar Sa{a Zekovi}, researcher of human rights' violations

23Eur op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9NGO a c t i v i t i e s

Centre for the Study of GlobalGovernance - London School of

Economics and Political Science andBelgrade based Foundation forHumanitarian Law organised on the07.01.2009 a one-day seminar titled"European Integrations and TransitionalJustice: From Retributive to RestorativeJustice". The goal of the seminar wasto provide a critical appraisal of theEuropean Union conditionality policyin the Western Balkans.

This one-day conference alsoprovided critical assessment of ret-ributive strategies of transitional jus-tice favored by the European Union,examined the need for restorativeapproaches, and analysed opportu-nities for support to civil society ini-tiatives in the field of transitional jus-

tice in the context of European inte-grations and the recently foundedCoalition for Regional Commissionfor Establishing the Facts about WarCrimes and other Grave HumanRights Violations in former Yugoslavia(Coalition for RECOM).

The conference also aimed todiscuss how restorative approachesto transitional justice can be inte-grated more closely with theprocess and aim of European inte-gration of the Western Balkans, andidentify possibilities for EU's institu-tional support for comprehensivetransitional justice approach in theregion. Centre for Civic Educationwas represented at the conferenceby its executive director, DDaalliibboorrkkaaUUlljjaarreevvii}}.

CCoorrrruupptt iioonn iinneedduuccaatt iioonn

In the framework of their jointproject "Corruption in Education"

Centre for Civic Education andCentre for Monitoring, with supportof the Government of the Republicof Germany organised a trainingseminar for high-school professors inorder to involve them more activelyin the fight against corruption inhigher education though their workwith high-school students.

The participants were intro-duced to the findings of the proj-ect thus far and the CEE ProjectAssociate Violeta Marniku spokeon behalf of the Centre about thecampaign that was conductedwithin the project as well as theresults of the study on the legalframework governing the work ofuniversities in Montenegro.

BBrr ii tt ii sshh MMPPssmmeeeett NNGGOO

rreepprreesseennttaatt ii vveess

During their recent visit toPodgorica British MPs Roger

Berry (head of the delegation),Stephen Hepburn, David Chaytor,Lord Lea of Crondall and NigelEvans met with the representativesof the civic sector on 17.02.2009 inthe British Embassy. On this occa-sion, Montenegro's civic sector wasrepresented by Daliborka Uljarevi},executive director of Centre forCivic Education, Mom~ilo Radulovi},secretary general of the EuropeanMovement in Montenegro, Vanja]alovi}, executive director of MANSand Savo Kentera, secretary generalof the Atlantic Club of Montenegro.They presented their views on theprocesses of European and Atlanticintegrations as well as the manychallenges that Montenegro is facingin the process of democratisation.

Up!FV!wjb!sfdpodjmjbujpo!xjui!uif!qbtu

Centre for Civic Education, withsupport of Friedrich Ebert

Foundation completed the admissionprocedure for the XIII generation ofDemocracy School. In the next fourmonths, 25 new participants willhave a chance to learn about thetheories and practices of democracy.

Democracy School is dedicatedto understanding the idea of democ-racy and ways in which this idea has

been implemented. It offers insightsinto theoretical background, compar-ative practices, as well as the arts andskills of implementing democraticprinciple in the everyday life, espe-cially in the political sphere.

The School is the oldest pro-gramme of alternative education inthis format in Montenegro, and inthe last twelve generations 283 citi-zens of Montenegro have success-

fully completed thecourse. Most of theparticipants come fromthe ranks of NGOactivists, political par-ties, journalists, localadministrations andministries, students andothers who are interest-ed in becoming politi-cally active and con-tribute to the develop-ment of democracy inMontenegro.

Efnpdsbdz!Tdippm!dpoujovft

24Eur op ean pu l s e N o 4 1

F e b rua ry , 2 0 0 9Educa t i on p r og rammes i n EU

F O R T H I S I S S U E W E R E C O M M E N D :

XXIITTHH BBEERRLLIINN RROOUUNNDDTTAABBLLEESSOONN TTRRAANNSSNNAATTIIOONNAALLIITTYYMMEEMMOORRYY PPOOLLIITTIICCSS::EEDDUUCCAATTIIOONN,, MMEEMMOORRIIAALLSSAANNDD MMAASSSS MMEEDDIIAAorganized by the Irmgard ConinxFoundation in cooperation with the SocialScience Research Center Berlin (WZB)and the Humboldt-University Berlin.50 successful applicants to the essaycompetition will be selected to partici-pate in the Berlin Roundtables onTransnationality and to discuss theirresearch with prominent scholars at twoof Europe's leading research institu-tions. The Roundtables take place atthe WZB from 21 - 26 October 2009.Deadline for essay submission: 30 June2009.An international jury will award athree-months fellowship to three par-ticipants to be used for research at theWZB, the Humboldt-University Berlinand the State library of Berlin. TheGrant includes a monthly stipend ofEUR 1,000 plus accommodation. Thewinners will be invited to join a follow-up workshop in Berlin in 2009/2010.Discussions will take place in threeworkshops chaired by Susanne

Buckley-Zistel, Ph.D. (Free UniversityBerlin), Elizabeth Cole, Ph.D. (UnitedStates Institute of Peace, WashingtonD.C.) and Magdalena Zolkos, Ph.D.(University of Western Sydney).Renowned professionals and expertssuch as Daniel Libeskind (architect,New York) and Albie Sachs (judge,Constitutional Court, South Africa) willgive accompanying evening lectures.The Irmgard Coninx Foundation willcover travel and accommodation costs.For details, please visit our website:www.irmgard-cconinx-sstiftung.deFor inquiries, please contact us:info@irmgard-cconinx-sstiftung.de

PPHHDD PPRROOGGRRAAMMMMEE IINNIINNTTEERRNNAATTIIOONNAALL SSTTUUDDIIEESSThis highly structured multidisciplinaryprogramme is composed of a minimumof 200 hours of coursework. Studentsfollow a common curriculum inInternational studies, methodology,research design and history, and attendadvanced seminars in their major andminor subjects, chosen from amongstthe disciplines of Economics, Law, andPolitics & Society. The coursework isconcentrated in the first year, with thethird semester being devoted to thecompletion of the research proposal. Atleast one semester must be spentabroad for research.The school invites applications acrossthe whole range of disciplines compris-ing international studies but particular-ly encourages students who intend tocarry out research in the followingareas: European and InternationalPolitics; European, Comparative andInternational Law; Open EconomyMacroeconomics, International Tradeand International Financial History. Onescholarship will be reserved for appli-

cants with a research project in thearea of the Politics of European andRegional Integration.The programme is conducted entirelyin English and will be taught by mem-bers of the university's multi-nationalfaculty. No tuition fees are charged anda number of fully funded three-yearscholarships will be awarded to thetop-ranked applicants. Scholarships willbe augmented by 50% for authorisedresearch periods spent abroad. At least50% of the admitted candidates will beoffered scholarships.Application deadline: March 31, 2009For the application forms and furtherdetails concerning the PhD programme,please consult our website http://por-tale.unitn.it/drsis/, or write to: PhDProgramme in International Studies,University of Trento, via Verdi 8/10, I-38100 Trento, Italy,Email: phd@sis.unitn.it

FFEELLLLOOWWSSHHIIPPSS AATT TTHHEEIIWWMM IINN VVIIEENNNNAA//AAUUSSTTRRIIAA RROOBBEERRTT BBOOSSCCHHFFEELLLLOOWWSSHHIIPPSSfor junior and senior scholarsApplication deadline: April 30, 2009Applications are accepted fromresearchers who- are citizens or permanently reside in

one of the following countries:Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina,Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Kosovo,Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania,Serbia, Slovenia,

- or are affiliated to a university orresearch institution in the region,

- or who pursue research on South-Eastern-EuropeFor further information go to:www.iwm.at/fellowships.htm

EIC Bulletin -EEuropean pulse is electronic magazine established within EIC programme, with the support of the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.The publisher is Centre for Civic Education.

EIC Bulletin -EEuropean pulse is registered with the Ministry for Culture and Media as item No. 578 Editor in Chief: Vladan @ugi}

Editorial Board: Vera [}epanovi}, Daliborka Uljarevi}, Ne|eljko Rudovi}, Dragan Stojovi}, Vladimir Vu~ini}, Petar \ukanovi}Tehnical Editor: Bla`o Crvenica; Language Editor: Milena Milunovi}; English Language Editor: Maja Mugo{a; Translation: Vera [}epanovi}

Njego{eva 36 / I Tel / fax: + 381 81 / 665 - 112, 665 - 327 E-mmail: eicbilten@cg.yuEIC Bulletin -EEuropean pulse can be downloaded at the www.cgo-cce.org