MEDIA ARCHIVES

VALUABLE THING
Source: Blic
      Comments
Rodoljub Šabić Commissioner for Information
Although slowly and with difficulty, transformation of our system of public information is approaching its final stage. Ending of the process of ownership transformation and privatization of media shall be prerequisites for elimination of influence of power on editorial policy, and therefore should be considered as prerequisite of more objective informing. One of the logical consequences of privatization and allocation of frequencies is decrease of the number of media, which in itself is not a problem. But, it is problematic because in relation to that, worry of the minority representatives haven't been anticipated in time, that the information in their languages could be seriously endangered or in some cases, eliminated. And it should have been, because one should have known that in market circumstances informing in minority languages is not at all “profitable service".
Solution is not in turning backwards and keeping the minority media in state ownership. It is well known, that however difficult, the solution should be searched for in improving the cost-effectiveness of operations and employees' professionalism, but also in providing new forms of financing, adequate to democratic society, that is, of subsidies. Of course, this should be regulated by laws. Just, it wouldn't be good to wait for that for a long time. Informing in minority languages is important for a relationship of our numerous citizens towards our state and their appraisal of state relationship towards them. So, this is not an issue of “profitable services", but of something precious.

 27-12-2007


...................................................................................................................................

NEW YEAR'S WISH
Source: Blic
   Hague Tribunal shall in due time stop its work. It is already a current question how shall in the future information be available from its archives, and where and how these archives are going to be kept? Contents of the archive have huge importance for international community, but for sure the most importance it holds for people, nations and states from ex-SFRY area. For our country and our citizens possibility to have free access to information contained in the archives is also very important. We should try to secure the widest possible preconditions for entitlement to that right. Within that, at least at first sight, it is not illogical and is already attractive, (in)formally launched idea from our side that Belgrade should become a seat of the Archives.
But, thinking about reality of this idea must not and can not circumvent the fact that we still don't have a law on opening the secret services' files of the previous regime, the law on secrets' classification, or the law on personal data protection. And for sure, in light of those unpleasant but relevant facts (in)consistency of our aspirations shall be evaluated. Then, we shall at least wish to pass the new laws in 2008 and not to be the last transitioning country without them.
The author is Commissioner for Information, Rodoljub Šabić

 27-12-2007


...................................................................................................................................

THE GOVERNMENT INVITES LAW INFRINGEMENT
Source: Danas
      Round table on execution of the decisions of the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance
Belgrade - The Government of Serbia doesn't provide for execution of decisions of the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, which represents an invitation for breaking the law, and the number of unexecuted decisions of the Commissioner has a constant growth tendency, has been concluded yesterday at the Round Table in Media Center, where representatives of OSCE and the Ministry of Culture have participated, as well as the Commissioner for Information, Mr. Rodoljub Šabić. The Commissioner Šabić pointed out that a problem in application of the Law on Free Access to Information does not represent securing execution of the Commissioner's decision, but also of the decision of the Supreme Court of Serbia, and lack of functioning of the Law implementation mechanisms, "because there is no faith in it" and no political will.
Lady-Head of the Media Department in OSCE Mission, Dragana Nikolić Solomon evaluated that the implementation of the Law on Free Access to Information has so far shown both its qualities and flaws. A serious shortcoming is, she points out, the fact that the Government of Serbia fails to provide execution of the Commissioner's decision, and the Ministry of Culture fails to provide implementation supervision.
- The problem is that we don't even have responsibility mechanism in case of Law infringement. In that enactment is quoted that the Government of Serbia, in case of need, is obliged to secure execution of the Trustee's decision, but it is not quoted how - said Šabić. He added that he has started the initiative several times, in order to form and administrative committee or a board in the Government, but his initiatives have been ignored. Šabić says that we currently have 195 Commissioner's decisions that haven't been executed and that since the beginning of application of the Law in 2005, until May this year, 132 decisions haven't been executed, and that lately that number has a constant growth. As he explained, it is necessary to adopt a Law on Confidential Data Classification, because it often happens that certain information are proclaimed state secret, as was the case with the salary of NIS' manager, and that is not a secret, because its publishing can not cause any damage whatsoever.
- In Europe data on managers' salaries in private companies, not just in public ones are published for a long time now - reminded Šabić. He stressed that a secret is determined on an accidental basis and behind that hide abuses, criminal, corruption or lack of results, and the problem is also that the supervision over law implementation has been allocated to the Ministry of Culture, which didn't have elementary prerequisites to do that. In Serbia there are between 10,500 and 12,000 subjects, quotes Šabić, subject to the Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance, and the Commissioner has sent to the Ministry of Culture around 1,300 decisions for law infringement. According to his words, only one person works on that job in the Ministry of Culture, because of what cases become outdated.
Deputy Minister of Culture, Dragan Janjić has stressed that his Ministry does not have a mechanism or the right to implement inspection for execution of the Commissioner's decision.
- Unfortunately, not much has been achieved in relocating the supervision from the Ministry of Culture to some other Ministry with a mechanism for Law implementation. Without that, there are no big results. I hope that it shall be done at the beginning of the next year - states Janjić.

 20-12-2007


...................................................................................................................................

PERSONALITIES OF THE YEAR BY OSCE MISSION IN SERBIA
Source: Blic
      Novi Sad University Rector, Belgrade judge, Commissioner for Information and Assistant Minister for Environmental Protection are awardees for the award „Personality of the Year“ of OSCE Mission in Serbia for 2007.
Novi Sad University Rector, Ms. Radmila Marinković-Nedučin has been awarded for exquisite contribution to enhancing education of national minority representatives at Novi Sad University. Judge Ms. Dragana Boljević received the award as a tribute for efforts to reform judicial system of Serbia. Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, Mr. Rodoljub Šabić has been awarded the award for his efforts to secure transparency in the work of state institutions, according to the Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance. Assistant Minister for Environmental Protection, Mr. Aleksandar Vesić has been awarded for exquisite contribution to preparation of the Sixth Pan-European Ministerial Conference for Environmental Protection held in October in Belgrade. „Each of those four personalities has in a significant and crucial way contributed to the success of mission in the last year, and that by cooperating with one of the program departments of our mission in implementing new projects and activities“, stated the Head of Mission, Hans Ola Urstad. All four awardees have decided to grant the financial part of the award, 7,700 euros worth to the Project „Invisible Children“ financed by the Mission, and implemented by NGO „Center for Integration of Youth“.

 19-12-2007


...................................................................................................................................

WHERE IS THE NOTE?
Source: Borba
     Police administration in Čačak still hasn't executed the order of the Commissioner for Information and informed the Association of Journalists of Serbia (Udruženje novinara Srbije - UNS) does it have a Note on alleged sexual harassment of sheep, submitted by Minister Velimir Ilić, has been reported to Beta Agency.
"The Police administration breaks the law and gives a negative contribution to otherwise ugly and unpleasant atmosphere in the public", evaluated for Beta Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, Rodoljub Šabić, reminding that he has issued the mandatory decision on December the 3rd.
He has especially stressed "ugly and unpleasant possibility" of facing the fact “that the Minister is referring to the police while launching rough, very insulting fabrications on behalf of journalists ".
"It would be also ugly and unpleasant to face the fact that we really have journalists who really do what the Minister's statement is adjudicating them. However, I think that the ugliest and the most harmful variant is that the police is against the law and decision of the state body in charge, not telling the truth", stated Šabić.
According to the Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance, Commissioner's decisions are mandatory, and in case of need their implementation shall be provided by the Government of Serbia.
"UNS' Chairman, Mr. Nino Brajović has informed me that in the next day or two the UNS shall submit a request to the Government of Serbia to secure execution of the decision", said Šabić. When asked if the Government has already secured execution of one of the mandatory decisions, Šabić replied negatively.
According to his words, the bodies in power mostly act according to the mandatory decision, but there are several dozens of cases of infringing that obligation. The procedure has been initiated on October 25th, when UNS requested information from Čačak police about the quotes of Minister Velimir Ilić that some of the journalists have harassed his sheep in Kačulice, where he is building a private clinic.

 14-12-2007


...................................................................................................................................

ON THE OCCASION OF DECEMBER THE 9TH
Source: Blic
      Silently, almost unnoticed, recently passed by us the news that a politician of controversial and sad destiny has been rehabilitated, but also one of our greatest and the best writers and connoisseurs of legal and political history and of the Constitutional Law. Day of Fight Against Corruption on December 9th was an opportunity to correct that at least a little bit, an opportunity to remember Slobodan Jovanović.
Why? - can ask somebody. He hasn't been linked to corruption activities. He wasn't either specially engaged in anti-corruption plan. However, dealing with other things, in one instance he said: „If the parties should become more important than anything else, the greater the danger that they should remain without beliefs and principles. Lacking beliefs and principles they strive to success for success' sake, to come to power as soon as possible and to keep it as long as possible. They become companies for exploitation of power, and as all groups lead by egoistic ideas, they spread corruption around themselves“. There are plenty of reasons to remember Slobodan Jovanović.

 09-12-2007


...................................................................................................................................

SALARIES OF "STRONGMEN" UNDER VEIL OF SECRET
Source: Pregled
      Order to public companies to report the amounts of remuneration to top executives
Belgrade
Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, Rodoljub Šabić, ordered the public companies to deliver to the Administrative Board of Serbian Assembly data about salaries and compensations of their management, has been stated yesterday from the Commissioner's Cabinet.
The statement quotes that, acting in line with the appeal of Administrative Board, the Commissioner issued decisions for the following public companies: PTT communications of Serbia, Putevi Srbije (Roads of Serbia), Airport „Nikola Tesla“, RATEL, RTS, NIS, NIS Petrol and Republic Water Directorate. „According to the law, those decisions are mandatory and those to whom they pertain are obliged to act accordingly within the set term“, stated Šabić, expressing hope that this is „bringing to an end the procedure, the implementation of which is by itself an absurd thing“.
He reminded that „in case of need“ the Government of Serbia is obliged to secure execution of those decisions.
Administrative Board has requested the information on salaries from the Government, that is, from the Ministry of Finance, and because it didn't receive them it turned to the Commissioner, who has sent the requests to the addresses of those concerned.
Šabić stated that three quarters have delivered the requested data to the Board, and against those who failed to do so the Board has submitted formal appeals to the Commissioner, based on which those decisions have been passed. Reminding that it is about bodies financed from the budget, Šabić evaluated as absurd that the working body of the highest executive power body has to request information that, according to the law, would have to be accessible to anyone, must request them with the Commissioner's assistance.
„In a democratic world, the part of which we aspire to be, it is unthinkable that the public could be deprived of such data. The public should have access to data regarding salaries and compensations of not only the management of the state companies, but also of many private companies“, he stated. Šabić also quoted Recommendation of the European Communities' Commission (2004/913/CE) providing that every company listed on the Stock Exchange should publicize the Declaration on Compensations Policy. „Speaking about publishing the information on individual compensations of managers and members of the Managing or Supervisory Board, in numerical order are quoted not only earnings, but also lump sum payments, fees, monetary shares in profit, compensations in the form of shares, potential pension benefits, even the amounts of the approved loans“, he said.
The European Communities' Commission considers publishing of such accurate, updated information as an important prerequisite for strengthening trust and for improvement of healthy practice of company management, concluded Commissioner for Information of Public Importance. Beta

 05-12-2007


...................................................................................................................................

PLATONIC LOVE FOR EU STANDARDS
Source: Danas
   Source: Danas
How to make something accessible to the public if it is not accessible to the members of parliament?
An action by the Information Commissioner and its Department which has by combination of circumstances, (un)deservedly attracted huge attention of media, should be ended very soon. It's time the Commissioner makes decisions according to appeals submitted by Administrative Board of the Parliament of the Republic of Serbia, due to some public companies and agencies failure to provide data on payments, i.e. fees of their directors and members of their management boards. Administrative Board has previously asked Serbian Government that is its Ministry of Finance to provide the information. The Board did not receive it and apparently unsatisfied, it turned to the Commissioner for information. Strictly formally, this way of applying to the Commissioner was not entirely legally correct. It would have been more correct to send those applications to addresses of some 60 subjects in question, regarding salaries and fees of the disputed managers. However, the Commissioner considered even a minimum of a proper attitude towards authority of the board of the highest state legislative body, demanded it sent the board's applications to the right addressers with a warning that the Law on free access to public information guarantees a right to access public information to all. The intervention by the Commissioner gave (relative) results. At least three quarters of some 60 subjects have submitted the requested data to the Administrative Board. The Board lodged an appeal to the Commissioner against some ten of those who had not done it. In accordance with the legally determined procedure, the Commissioner forwarded the appeals to those who they had been lodged against, leaving them a deadline to declare about the appeals. Freely taking over the risk to be blamed for prejudged speaking, I will state that it's not at all a problem to assume that these decisions are for the benefit of the right of public knowledge. Only when the companies, or agencies, to which the decisions would apply, act accordingly, that is when, perhaps, Serbian Government, if necessary, temporarily executes the Commissioner decisions, the “struggle” of the Administrative Board would at least be ended.
Anyhow, the Law on free access to public information in article no.2 defines public information as follows: “information at disposal of public authority, created in operation or with reference to operation of authority, is contained in a certain document and related to anything that is justifiably in public's interest to be informed of.” Article no.3 says by definition of this law public authority among other things is every “legal person founding or financing on the whole, that is mostly the state, or a state authority as well”, while article no.5 says that ”everyone is entitled to have access to public information…” Consequently, everyone has that right. Everyone means everybody, including Administrative Board. Only that Board - that is operating body of the highest legitimate public authority, comprised of some 20 members of parliament from all the parliamentary parties - should mean even more than just “everyone”. It is absurd indeed that such a body finds itself in need to collect such information based on the Law on free access to public information and to seek its right protection from the Information Commissioner as well. It is all more absurd as the directors and the public companies' and agencies' management is appointed by governing political parties, the same ones the parliament members of which are members of Administrative Board. So, they are political parties that declare Serbian integration in Europe, that is adopting European legal and life standards, as their special credo, as one of the main ideas of their political activity. Based on this specific case it is concluded that such love, i.e. affiliation towards European standards, is only platonic and it does not imply an actual contact with them. The reason for this is that in the context of the European standards it is literally unconceivable question public right to be familiar with the data on salaries and fees of the management in public companies and agencies. Moreover, according to such standards it is perfectly normal that data on salaries in public companies and many private ones are available to the public. In order to picture this it is worthwhile to mention some of the standpoints of the European Community Commission stated in the Recommendation (2004/913/CE), published in the European Union Official Gazette from December 29th 2004. In the section no.2.of the Recommendation, among other things, it is stated that every company rated on the stock market, should announce a declaration on its fee policy, which among other things, means it should also be placed on the company's web site. As for publishing information on individual fees of the “administrators”, that is directors, members of Administrative or Supervisory Board or any other managing body in a company, Section no.3 specifies not only the overall amount of profit and other money returns from contract payments, profit sharing, commission, but also by options given on shares or shares, thence possible special pension benefits, even amounts spent on loans or administrator loans guarantees. Why is this so? I guess the reason is, as it is written in the mentioned Recommendation, “publishing accurate and updated information builds trust and is an excellent method for promoting a wholesome practice of company management”. Well, aren't these two things, just what we desperately need?

 03-12-2007


...................................................................................................................................

ANOTHER YEAR
Source: Blic
   “The European Council Parliament adopted a Resolution on measures for dispersing legacies of former totalitarian systems at its 23rd session. Item no.9 of the document, very important for freedom breakthrough of accessing “top secret” information says: Parliament welcomes public revealing of the secret service files in some of the former communist countries. It calls on all countries to allow those who are interested and make requests to access their files created by secret service. Almost all of the former socialist countries followed this initiative by the European Council.
Unfortunately, our country did not. It's been a decade this year since the European Council Parliament's Resolution has been adopted, six years from the autocratic regime downfall in our country and three years from our country's admittance into European Council. Each of the “anniversaries” warns us it is a high time to do something of immense importance for our country's international recognition and further democratic transition, by enacting the Law on opening secret service files. “
I published the quoted text here at the same place in November 2006. Another year has passed. Of course I do not think, there is a reason for satisfaction, in that after a year, during which we even presided the European Council, it is still an open issue.

 29-11-2007


...................................................................................................................................

HONOR WELL DESERVED
Source: Blic
    Commissioner for information of public importance in Serbia is not in the position to often praise our government departments. Not because he does not wish, but because, regrettably so there are not many reasons for that. This is why recognitions for work done on implementation of the law, are rarely given, for example on celebration of September 28th, official Day of public's right to know. Even then, the recognition is not given by the Commissioner himself, but a special board made of journalists, media associations, NGOs, which should be the guarantee of objectivity. Still, even then there is a fear that the laureate could, with his subsequent actions cast a shadow on his award.
This is why it is encouraging, that of this year's laureate -Ministry of Government Administration and local self-governance, has published its yearly report of their activity on their website accessible for people with special needs. Through the use of special software, transforming letters and pictures into voice or Brayer symbols, data will be accessible to the citizens who are blind or nearly blind.. By taking this step, the Ministry has effectively confirmed that the recognition, without a doubt was well deserved, and has also set an example fort other sectors to follow.

 20-11-2007


...................................................................................................................................

GOOD EXAMPLES ARE RARE
Source: Danas
   Commissioner for information held talks with war time and organized crime prosecutors.
Belgrade - Readiness of the prosecutors, Vladimir Vukčević and Miljko Radisavljević to perform their obligations from the Law on free information access with maximum responsibility is important and their examples are good, but not so frequent. Many examples are of problems attempting to ensure the right to free information access from various prosecutor offices, even significant cases - Commissioner for public significance information Rodoljub Šabić assessed after yesterdays talks with war times and organized crimes prosecutors Vukčević and Radisavljević.
- Many problems occur in communication of the public with prosecutor's offices and it is very important that the situation improves. Previous Heads of the most important prosecutor's offices, primarily the Republic and Belgrade municipal, to say the least, had no specific relations to the Law requirements. In due time I will have talks on the subject with the new acting State Attorney Slobodan Radovanović with the belief that this will result in useful tips for implementation of the Law on free information access - stressed Šabić. He added that he discussed with the prosecutors the matter of realization of rights to free information access within the legal bodies, and especially in prosecutor's offices, judging that the talks were very useful.
Vladimir Vukčević has announced that the Prosecutor Office for war crimes was from the start aware of the fact that transparency of the tribunal's work is a must, and that it will continue to be so, namely that they will be informing the public on cases which this office is working on. He has explained that in the last 3 years 14 requests were filed and none of them were rejected or refused.
The P.R. of the Prosecutor Office Bruno Vekarić has explained that in 90 percent of the cases request are filed by the NGO-s.
Special prosecutor for fight against organized crime Miljko Radisavljević announced that the Office is ready to make available all the public significance information.

 10-11-2007


...................................................................................................................................

WITHOUT A DOUBT
Source: Blic
   commentaries
Rodoljub Šabić Information Commissioner
All information on public funds spending, in the democratic society are, without a doubt information of public significance. In such society it is unimaginable to withhold such information from the public, not to mention withholding such information among government sectors. This is why it is worrisome and inductive that the Administrative Committee of the National Parliament of Serbia, had to ask the assistance of the Commissioner for the information after not being able to obtain information on salaries for appointed persons in companies, agencies, and directories whose founder is the Republic of Serbia.
If such information is so inaccessible to the Committee of the highest body of the judicial branch of authority, what are the chances for the journalist or “average” citizen to effortlessly obtain such information.? What are the chances for the public to perform its duty of supervising the government? Do we know, for example if there is any system in the system of incomes and allowances in the government companies and agencies? Do we know for sure how many of them are there? Do we know what and how each of them does?
Minimum of the accountability is necessary in order to resolve numerous problems, and having reliable answers to these questions is the unconditional prerequisite. Whether these responses are positive or not, they represent first class information . And such information the public has the right to know.

 07-11-2007


...................................................................................................................................

DIFFICULT ROAD TO PUBLIC DATA
Source: Pregled
    Free information access - media and citizen' right
Free access to public information is the right of media and citizen's and they should insist on it since this is one of the basic prerequisites of the democratic society, pointed out the Commissioner for information of public importance Rodoljub Šabić participating in Novi Pazar round table panel dedicated to freedom of the media and freedom to public significance information access. Round table was organized in the cooperation with the OESS mission in Serbia, IJA (NUNS), AJS (UNS) and Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Serbia.. "Democratic societies are based on the idea that the public has the right to know, in principal all in the affairs of the government. And free information access available from the government enables the public to be informed better and government officials to be more accountable.", said Šabić. Šabić has pointed out that in transitional societies such as ours, expansion of space for free information access "is the basic pre-requisite and expression of the democratization and fight against governmental misuse and corruption". Public newspapers and journalists have a special, very important role and in order for them to fulfill it , there must be a clear set of rules on free information access enabling collecting data on the government. Šabić assesses that the Law on free information access is one of the Laws stipulating such rules, but it is not sufficient to only adopt the laws, but to ensure effective and coherent implementation. " Because of those unwilling to accept and respect this, it is essential to finally activate measures stipulated in the law, for the implementation of free information access right, and if otherwise impossible to enforce them by coercion, in other words make those not enforcing the law accountable.", said Šabić. 

 02-11-2007


...................................................................................................................................

WHISTLE BLOWERS BACK AGAIN?
Source: Politika
    Classification of certain information as confidential understands legal procedure and protection mechanisms. To avoid random will and misuse. Data or documents classified as confidential once, do not necessarily remain so forever, but depending on how confidential they are, they do have “expiry date.".
These are some of the news that should be included in the future law on confidentiality, and whose model was presented to us yesterday by the authors, professor dr. Vladimir Vodinelić, m.a. Dejan Milenković and Rodoljub Šabić, public information Commissioner. Only few countries in Europe do not have contemporary law on secrets, and also the one on free information access needs to be supplemented..
Šabić has noticed that for its implementation, a political will is the key, but also the accountability mechanisms in cases of not respecting it. In the three year period there were several thousand offences of that law , only about hundred processed and only five brought to justice, says he. Few dozen of those requests were issued to the Government in charge of implementing decisions of the Commissioner, on the part of the Commissioner himself but none were implemented.
In the future it is suggested that in place of the person in charge of information access, a head of the government authority becomes in charge, and to introduce institute of outsider or whistle blower. It is the person who in spite of duty to guard as confidential certain information, makes these information available in cases of corruption and similar illegal actions as the insider would not under be called upon to answer..
Coalition for free information access gathering several non governmental organizations intents to shortly start collecting citizens of Serbia signatures to make sure that the models of these laws are brought to the Serbian Parliament as soon as possible.

 26-10-2007


...................................................................................................................................

DIRECTORS WORTH WELL OVER HUNDRED THOUSAND
Source: Vecernje novosti
   Data on SALARIES in public companies ARRIVE
Information "provided" by Rodoljub Šabić
Addressed to the Administrative Committee of National Parliament, the data on salaries of public companies' heads, of members of managing and supervising boards, have arrived.. The envelopes have been opened only when the M.P.s have complained to Rodoljub Šabić, the Commissioner for public significance information. Even though the key idea was for parliamentarians to prove that there are those who make significantly more money, while only the members of parliament are put on "pillar of shame", the data was officially unavailable yesterday.
This was announced from the parliament platform by the member of SPS Rajko Baralić:
- There are few thousand appointees in Serbia and they all receive appanage of more than hundred thousand dinars. Director of Agency for foreign investments has 137.000 dinars. Those running "Public shelters of Serbia", have 110.000, members of management board 50.000, supervising board 44.000 dinars. Director of the Republic Directory for property has 133.000, and assistants, i.e. deputies 118.000 and 93.000. Public Company "Electro system of Serbia" - general manager has 289.713 dinars, his deputy 140.000, president SB 91.350 dinars, supervising board - 45.000 dinars. Director of Agency for licensing managers of bankruptcies 137.000 dinars.
According to the Šabić report, director of the Directory for measures and precious metals has a salary of 126.792 dinars, director "Railway of Serbia" 125.000, president of SB 104.000, member of SB 81.000.

 26-10-2007


...................................................................................................................................

GOVERNMENT SECRETIVE ABOUT THE NUMBER OF OFFICIAL VEHICLES
Source: Blic
   After a month's effort, "Blic" has been unable to retrieve insight in data on the number of official vehicles available to government authorities in the year 2000., nor the information on the number in use presently, from the Directory of Communal Affairs. As we were told by the Government of Serbia office in charge, such information is non existent.
Even though "Blic" has officially launched a complaint with the Information Commissioner's Office, to Rodoljub Šabić, from the Directory of Communal Affairs we have only received information on the number of vehicles which were given for use by this office to the government authorities. In their response, it says that in the year 2000 , for the Government Directory, 60 official vehicles were made available and in this year 84. However, it is estimated that the number of vehicles used by the government authorities is much bigger, since ministries, agencies and directories have vehicles in their own possession.
- Such data is non existent. Every office has their own record keeping, but there are too many of them and they are hard to join - says for "Blic" Head of Government's office for media relations , Milivoje Mihajlović.
However, Mihajlović has two weeks earlier said that Directory for Communal Affairs should carry such data, and that we should be able to retrieve them in few days.
- It is scandalous. If they know how much paper a government spends, surely they have information on the vehicle number. It is correct that every department has their record keeping, but, as far as I know such data is submitted to the department in charge of the Government of Serbia - commented Information Commissioner Rodoljub Šabić. Directory for Communal Affairs, in accordance with the effective ruling, among other things, deals in transportation affairs, maintenance, repair and parking of official vehicles for the purpose of government authorities.
Excerpt :Official vehicles for ministers and secretaries
Entitled to use official vehicles are ministers and government officials, and they ride in following makes "Audi", "Volkswagen", "Skoda" and "Peugeot". This directory services the Cabinet of the President with 6 vehicles, while for the Presidency of Serbia, three official vehicles are made available.

 26-10-2007


...................................................................................................................................

ORIGINAL CONCEPT
Source: Blic
    Comments
Rodoljub Šabić Information Commissioner
It is undisputable that for quality implementation of any law, it is indispensable that those it refers to understand it, i.e., to experience it, whether it is pleasant or not, as necessary and useful. But, besides, and irrelevant to this, the fact should be uncontested for everyone that no responsible conception of law implementation should be lacking in its compulsive implementation mechanism and punishment of those who brake it. However, certain things, I, as Information Commissioner, am facing in practicality of implementation of the Law on free information access tell us that it is not so.
The Law, indeed provides for the rulings of the Information Commissioner to be binding, and in case of necessity, the execution is enabled by the Government of Serbia, and it places several punishable acts and the filing of lawsuits under the jurisdiction of the corresponding Ministry. However, in three year practice, during which thousands of offences were committed, only a hundred legal processes have been initiated, and a total present tally is 5 financial sentences delivered...
In few dozen cases in which the citizens, media, non governmental organizations and others asked the Government of Serbia to enable execution of Commissioner's rulings, it has not been done as of yet. What is in question? Is it the "original" concept of the Law implementation? Or irresponsibility? Or passive resistance? Or obstruction? One thing is for sure, which ever it is, it's not good.

 25-10-2007


...................................................................................................................................

PAPER AWAY FROM REALITY
Source: Danas
   Rodoljub Šabić
Personal attitude
A recent statement of Drago Kosa, president of GRECO (Group of countries for fight against corruption SE), has attracted attention from the public, with a good reason. A main reason should not be fearing the potential threat of effectuation of a so called procedure for uncooperative countries. Declaration, indeed contains a warning in case our country fails to fulfill recommendations from the biggest anti-corruption initiative, it could face being subjected to this procedure, as well as possible unpleasant diplomatic and other consequences. However, that threat is not too real. There were other countries with similar problems in implementation of recommendations of GRECO, but I guess, only one was pronounced officially uncooperative (Georgia). However there are strong domestic reasons in favor of paying a full attention to a declaration of the President of GRECO. Because, volens nolens, it talks about the fact that we should not be putting our heads in the sand when facing a phenomena telling us that they are characteristic to our „anticorruption concept“. First is the obvious gap between results of the enactment compared to the realistic plan.. Results in production of enactment and action documents are much” better” than anti corruption results in real life. Concerning this, vivid are recommendations of GRECO XIII, XV and XXV, which anticipate introduction and implementation of action plan for national strategy implementation for fight against corruption and introduction into a system the two very important institutions - the Ombudsman and the State Auditing Institution . Recommendation no. XIII „has been realized“ through adoption of the Action Plan. Implementation of this plan was supposed to have been supervised by the Agency, whose establishing was anticipated by the Strategy itself, but was never done. The Government opted, as a transitional solution, to establish a Multi Department board, but the necessary work conditions for its operation were not established, and of course it is not functional. Also recommendations XV and XXV have, pertaining to enactment, been realized long time ago, because the Law on Ombudsman and State Auditing Institution were introduced two years ago. But, they are actually not operational yet. Considering all realistic and hypothetical problems regarding provision of financial, material, logistic conditions for commencement of operation of anticorruption government body, it is more than obvious that there was more than enough time for solving these problems and mishaps as these could be “explained” by the people in charge in many ways, but without genuine justification. The other relevant phenomena is almost ignoring connection to experiences of others which suggest that the best results in the fight against corruption can and must be searched for on two plans, both of which are neglected here. First is in the plan of visibility, namely publicity of administrative procedures, accessibility of information on public proceedings of the public authority, various models of exterior control, not only courts and parliament, but foremost the media, journalists and citizens. Also, on the training plan and preparation for implementation of new standards of government-public rapport, on rights of the public in democratic society and responsibility of the government, as well as training for the purpose of adopting new knowledge and skills, i.e. standards, methods and procedures which are applied for the purpose of fight against corruption, in countries with far better results. In that context the situation with recommendations I and XIV is illustrative. Recommendation talks of the need of improvement of implementation of the Law on public procurement, particularly through undertaking of training for government officials which participate in the process of public procurements, and recommendation XIV entails undertaking of training for public officials on rights of the public entitled by the Law on free access to public significance information, and implementation of a campaign for informing general public with the content of this law. Even though the Laws on public procurements and free information access are not new any more, since they have been introduced several years ago, and training of personnel is a government duty, since now, only two government bodies have dealt with training of employees, with the cooperation of civil sector; Directory of Public Procurement and Commissioner for public significance information. At the same time, the two bodies are lacking by far in personnel, logistic, material and other potential which would enable them to perform their regular duties, not to mention an adequate program of training which would at least cover the most relevant government bodies. The circumstances of this being well known , and still the requests of all government bodies in obtaining necessary conditions for carrying them out, are not met. Situation being as it is, it's not good that so far, the only reaction to a warning statement of President of GRECO was a hint of introduction of several more anti-corruption laws. It is certainly not disputed that, not only several new laws need to be introduced in continuity, but also ratification of all corresponding international documents. However, this only makes sense with full awareness of the fact that simply that, on itself means nothing, and it can not yield necessary results. Adoption of the law, without real life conditions for its implementation and without a responsible analyses of this implementation, as well as undertaking of international obligations without a genuine will to execute them, shall bring no good. On the contrary. For, the struggle against corruption is not on paper, but in real life terrain. The whole point of it, is to be better, on the corruption index , than Surinam or Gabon or Bosnia or Macedonia, regardless. The point is, to make ourselves better, as much as we can.

 24-10-2007


...................................................................................................................................

DESIRES AND DEEDS
Source: Blic
   Recent announcement with a warning, for our country from the President of GRECO (Group of countries fighting against corruption SE)for not fulfilling recommendations of this biggest international anticorruption initiative, that our country could be submitted to the procedure for uncooperative countries, with unpleasant consequences, surely deserves our serious attention.. Not due to the fear of the "threat” of the possible implementation of this procedure. Besides the threat is not overly realistic, due to the fact that there were more countries facing problems with implementation of certain recommendations, and yet only one (Georgia) was formally pronounced uncooperative .The warning of the President of GRECO deserves attention since, while reminding us that Serbia, not even when it held the Presiding position of CE did not fulfill most of the recommendations, including setting up necessary conditions for the operation of anti corruption bodies, the announcement draws attention to some understandings which appear dominant and can not yield needed results. Accepting obligations without a will or ability to respect them, or adopting laws without creating realistic conditions for their implementation and without the analysis of that implemementation, can not bring any good, au contraire. Fight against corruption is not a matter of desires but of deeds. It is not a "match" on paper but on real life terrain. The most important thing is not to beat Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, Georgia, S. Arabia.. The most important is to win over ourselves . Rodoljub Šabić Information Commissioner.

 19-10-2007


...................................................................................................................................

(NON) PUBLIC SPENDING
Source: Blic
      Commentaries
Rodoljub Šabić, Information commissioner
Recently it has been established among other things, at a significant gathering of business people and financial experts, that Serbia is potentially a record breaking country in the matter of public spending and that it is of utmost importance to take measures to change this trend and to prevent, in reversed case inevitable extremely damaging effects. Evaluation, obviously accurate, almost "not interesting". This is why this event, taking place in Vranje was interesting for me, more to the fact that at the same time, I received a complaint against municipal authorities for denying the public insight into act on employees systematization in the local government, saying that above mentioned is “an official secret”. As many similar, this complaint reminds that “inflated” public spending is no abstract notion shown only in the budget percents and GDP, but that it expresses itself concretely in unnecessary activities, overload of employees, immoderate, unjustified expenditures, etc. Is it morally justified that data on the number of employees, public procurements, expense account and gifts is deemed a “secret” for the public, who, bottom line finance all this? And is it, from a rational point of view, licit to ignore the experience of others telling us that cutting down on high public spending, among other things understands full insight of financial dealing of the authority.

 12-10-2007


...................................................................................................................................

HELP FOR DOZEN CITIZENS
Source: Danas
  Following the announcement of the Law on sign language
Rodoljub Šabić
Personal attitude
Information was published recently that our country will attain the Law on sign language. In the scope of public information on planned activities, Ministry of Labor and Social Policy has announced introduction of this law during next year.
It is a question of idea, which among other things represents standardization of our sign language. A number of people, first of all deaf-mute children, communicate using sign language - made of arm and body movements, gestures, facial expressions, manual alphabet and signs. It is known today, that this language even though we do not perceive it sonorously, contains all linguistic specifies as other languages. It is not universal, for, there are many national sign languages. There is ours, but it is not standardized yet, the fact bearing bad consequences.
Standardization would better serve quality of communication of deaf-mute persons, among themselves and with the environment, and would offer better opportunities for information access necessary for their active involvement in the social life. However, though it is not disputable that we should welcome the announced introduction of this law, positive impression should not fog some problems which will not be resolved by mere introduction of the announced law. In this matter we should conclude two essential things.
Firstly, introduction of this law is no acknowledgement of the sign language, nor is it any special condition for its application. Even for sturdy prigs who always look for formal legal framework in order to institutionalize “ new “ human rights, an existence of such universal base should be sufficient making legal acknowledgment unnecessary. It is a matter of completely relevant international document, Convention of UN on protection and advancement of rights and dignity of disabled people namely the fact that this international document, among other things, insists on implementing the rights of sign language use. Nowhere in the world is the sign language forbidden. And, all over the world, whether the law exists or not, the scale of sign language actual use in life, especially public, is one of the indicators of the level of democratic social relations.
Secondly, the sign language is not a sole communication device for deaf and hard of hearing, especially in the matters of education and information. It is a practical and fast communication system, primarily for purpose of daily communication. For education purposes and quality access to complex information, which is an essential prerequisite for inclusion of deaf and hard of hearing in the social life as equal members, more is required.
Therefore, the introduction of the Law on sign language has twice the value. Lesser by itself, and bigger as a warning to some questions pertaining not only to deaf and hard of hearing, but also to questions pointed out through other experiences. For instance, Slovenia has standardized the sign language long ago, and introduced Law on it. Deaf reserve the right to use free of charge the services of sign language interpreter, for 30 hours per year, i.e. 100 hours for educational purposes. But even there, in countries which have done more, it is confirmed that the sign language is only one element of the legal system of protection for individuals with special needs, a system which is complex and can not be reduced to a free interpreter, but imposes on all elements of the society certain obligations for better implementation of the rights of the deaf.
The best expression of this concept is probably The Americans with Disabilities Act - ADA (Law on Americans with disabilities) American law which deals with the rights of deaf and hard of hearing not as a separate issue, but in the context of all persons with special needs. This Law obligates all - social services, schools, sports facilities and employers, Zoo gardens, theatres, banks, restaurants, department stores, museums, libraries and of course before all authorities to adjust their means of communication for persons with special needs , which includes providing special tools.
Naturally, for implementation of such a concept, we lack material, financial and logistic presumptions. This, of course is no reason, not to do as much as possible. In this context, this topic is valuable also as a reminder to some questions of importance, being that proper answers to them are essential prerequisites to a true democratization of the society.
To what extent are the information of public importance accessible to all? How often this accessibility depends on non existence of ramps and elevators for wheelchairs? How could the blind find them through Brayer alphabet? And how often can they reach it, through use of adequate for contemporary times lingual software? How much are they published to be accessible to deaf persons? How many persons are there with special needs?
At least to the last question, we have a reliable answer. In any case, there are at least 10% of such persons in any society. Society aspiring to be democratic , should not marginalize such a number of people and should initiate all it can to provide a better information access. For the guaranteed equality and contributions they could give in establishing necessary mechanisms for checking of authorities..
   

 08-10-2007


...................................................................................................................................

STATE SECRET NON EXISTING
Source: NIN
   Interview
RODOLJUB ŠABIĆ, PROTECTOR OF THE PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO KNOW
There were no media or citizen requirements to render minutes from negotiations on the future of Kosovo, and even if there were, the negotiating team is not a government authority so I would not be in the position to intervene, and if I could I would certainly treat such a request as a delicate matter.
Rodoljub Šabić, Commissioner of public significance information, has all the reason and more to be proud. Today, a saying “I will complain to Šabić” is not only used by defenseless people but also by the powerful 7th force, the media. Therefore, for all you want to know, and they won't let you, take it up with Šabić. He is, according to the law, authorized to protect the public's right TO KNOW. These days, before judges, acting on notice from Ministry of Culture, first judgments are rendered (by no fault of their own) to government officials due to a fact that their chiefs have denied this people's right.
If RTS declined to broadcast directly sessions of the National Parliament of the Republic of Serbia, would this jeopardize the public's right to know, based on which, the Law on access to public information is based, and the protection of which is your job?
- We have to appease two interests here. One is a public interest to know what the government authorities do, and especially an important one as the Parliament, moreover to the fact that we have a tradition of struggle for the infamous public in that sense - where the main request of the opposition is for a broadcast of Parliament sessions, so the annulation of it is a delicate matter. On the other hand, we now have this public service, and basic presumption of its operation is that no one influences its editing policy. I personally am of the opinion that a high level of publicity of broadcast should be provided, but the answer to this question should not be given by politicians or experts, but people dealing with technical aspects of media functioning: is the solution in cable channel or parliamentary channel? In any case we have to find something that will appease two principles: neither RTS should determine the editing of daily schedule of the Parliament, nor should anyone order public service around on what to do.
Public service is financed from citizens' subscription. How do the citizens supervise the service they finance?
- From the point of free information access, I treat RTS as a government body. We had instances where RTS was given requests to provide access to certain documents and they fall under the Law on free access to significant public information.
Well, all right, who would be authorized, according to you to decide whether to broadcast or not?
- I believe that the decision is on RTS.
When you say that you assume that RTS is under no political influence, is it?
- I can hardly judge from this position, RTS has entered into a process of transforming in the public service. But, it would be naďve to say that it is completely emancipated from political influence. I don't believe it is completely.
You have publicly agreed with all demands to open sessions of the Cabinet of Serbia for public. One of your arguments was the position that this is practice in the neighboring countries. I am asking you which countries, and more importantly, are the Cabinet sessions of Germany and France open for journalists?
- This initiative of nongovernmental sector I consider good in perspective. Cabinet is ruling on decisions important for this society, and personally I believe it is good for the public to know how they do it, in what manner and under which conditions. That does not necessarily mean that everything in the Cabinet operation should be public. Moreover the Cabinet will decide on certain delicate matters more often than the Parliament, which at certain times could not be accessible to public. But this does not mean that nothing in the work of the Cabinet matters should be public. Here is an example which is specific, and the party in question is not a country which attained enviable level of democracy, so then Croatia. In Croatia, accredited journalists attend Cabinet sessions, behind glass barrier with audio-visual contact. When it comes to a point in the agenda which calls for exclusion of the public, you can put down the blinds and turn off the audio. As for Germany it got the federal Law on information access only last year, but many of 16 lands had that law earlier. As for their Cabinet sessions, I don't know if they are open for public. But in these countries this story is not a matter of law, but a completely different relationship of public and authority is understood over there.
But, I would like to remind you of Iraq case: was the public in America and Britain truthfully informed about reasons for intervening in Iraq?
- No, it wasn't. We have no illusions. Nowhere in the world has this story gone smoothly. These are, so called, rights of heavy inertia, they have to be conquered. But, once they have been conquered, and when journalists, citizens teach the government publicity, there is no going back. I know that this law feels slow for journalists, but I have felt the real changes when the journalists started using and insisting on it. However this law was not written for the press. To a good journalist, the information is late even if it they get it today, they say: why didn't I get it yesterday. But for a particular journalism: investigative, engaging -sometimes you will search for the document for a year - this could prove to be useful.
It is written in the law, and you have once before mentioned to me that you are in charge of providing public insight into a certain carrier of information, i.e. which exists as a document. Could it happen that the government body purposely doesn't record information on its work, important for the public, namely, is there an obligation for the government bodies to make notes?
- This presumption is possible, and in certain circumstances even probable. No one can be made to record information, by this law. .
Does the negotiating team for Kosovo belong to a government body in your competency?
- Strictly formal, it is not a government body, because government body is a subject of the law, something that understands particular definition, formed by the law. This is not the case; this team is in the political sphere. In this context, Commissioner for information of public significance could not treat the negotiating team as a government body.
Is the negotiating team obliged to keep minutes for public insight? And has it been a case until now that someone has required seeing them?
- Considering that they have not been founded by the law, we can hardly talk of their obligation to this or that? But surely there are written evidences of their work. So far, no one from media has required such information on negotiations on K and M, but I have to tell you that this would be a delicate request. Our Law on free access of public information of significance is very liberal, surprisingly liberal for our environment , but still it provides for option in certain cases to deny access to certain information prevailing the public right to know. We could say that certain questions connected to activity of the negotiating team could be in the sphere of not desiring to show cards, neither in front of the partner from the other side, nor in front of the international public.
Surely you have noted that our public constantly negates official allegations that NATO in the year 1999. has fired depleted uranium only a few spots in the South of Serbia and targets on Kosovo. Were there any requests from citizens or media for the government body to provide them such information?
- As I recall there was a request for that, and interestingly enough, not from our citizens but from a foreign non governmental organization. I believe it was organization “Norwegian Aid “. They requested from our MIA, these information. I believe in this case it is a question of first class importance information. As I recall MIA has handed over information they had, but in this case it is a matter of, whether there are all documents about it.
Can you in any manner force any government body to collect information on whether, in sectors controlled by the army, depleted uranium munitions were used?
No. We should as a State have these data, but I do not know if we do, and I can not order anyone to create a document on something if this document is non existing. I can only establish that a certain organ has denied you the right to access a certain document, and instruct them to give you a copy of the document. If the body does not act upon it, commissioner hasn't got the factual or legal power to make them do it. According to Law, this should be done by the Cabinet of Serbia. This was expected from the Cabinet, in few dozen cases, and it is a serious problem, Cabinet of Serbia hasn't done it once. This is almost an invitation for breaking the law.
In public, from serious doctors there are information and rumors that the number of cancer patients in the recent years has amounted to epidemic level. Have you had anyone requesting such information from you?
- No one. Interestingly, no one has.
Recent days we had speculations in the newspapers of police brutality. Has anyone asked for assistance from MIA and afterwards from you, in publicly showing the details on how wide spread the police brutality in the force is?
- Such sort of general statistics hasn't been asked for. But there were requests for documents of specific individual cases. In number of cases these information were given. MIA has in organizational sense done a lot in terms of following this Law, while the Safety Information Agency ignores it completely. They will not respond to completely benign obligations and requests. I have had a talk once with Mr.Rade Bulatović on this matter, and was under the impression that he understood, but. The attitude of SIA is more so strange if you ask me, since most of these requests were totally benign. For instance, people wanted to know the location of elimination of some of their ancestor, and the sole serious request is the information on the number of wired citizens in a year. Not even who did it, not even where, or why, or in what manner, only the number. But SIA has refused to give out such information even after the Supreme Court ruling. In the neighboring Montenegro, same question was raised and information was given, not only on the number of wired but also on the number of employees in their identical agency. And it is known how many people are employed in our SIA - 2.286 people.
- And which is, according to you a bigger secret: a number of employed or a number of wired? I am going to tell you: a number of employed in a certain service says clearly about the potentials of that service. A number of wired in a year says nothing.
Many times you have mentioned official and business secret. And you claim that this is not regulated in the law at all. However, I can see that you have called upon this prevailing interest in the matter of request denials. What exactly are you calling upon, then?
- Whenever I act, I call upon the Law which I am protecting. All countries but us, and I believe Montenegro; have laws on classification of data or secrets, if you will.
You are a jurist. Isn't a fact that there is no Law on state secret legally conclusive to the fact that nothing is a State secret?
- Of course not. We have more than few hundred laws and regulations, some take this matter seriously, some superficially, often enough they are contradictory, and all are anachronous and surpassed. You are not going to believe this, as far as I know there are regulations dating from 1958 still in everyday use. Imagine the criteria on confidentiality from 1958 and 2007. It is a humiliating chaos.

 04-10-2007


...................................................................................................................................

EQUALITY
Source: Blic
   Commentaries
Rodoljub Šabić - Information commisioner
A recent information hasn't attracted public's attention it deserves. It is an announcemt that we will attain a Law on sign laguage in the next year. It is a question of standardizing symbols, which will enable deaf people better communication and better access to important information for their active inclusion in the social life.. Idea is valuable by itself, but also as a reminder of some questions which are not «technical», because solid answers to them are prerequisites of true democratization of society.
Are the information of public significance accessible to all? How often is their access dependable on (not) setting up ramps or elevators for wheelchairs for disabled? How can blind people find them in Brayer alphabet? Are they always, whenever possible published so that they are accessible to deaf? How many persons with special needs are there, at all? It is known, in each society there are many, at least 10%. For a society aspiring to be democratic, it is of first class importance not to leave these people “on the margins” and to provide them, the best possible information access.

 02-10-2007


...................................................................................................................................

COMMERCIAL COURT RECEIVES AWARD
Source: Politika
Awards for implementation of the Law on Free Access to Information granted to the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-government and the Municipality of Smederevo.
“I admit it does seem a bit unusual that you should receive an award just for obeying the law”, said the Minister of Public Administration and Local Self-government, Mr. Milan Marković, commenting on the award that Ministry received for its contribution to the implementation of the Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance. The main award for implementation of the Law and for transparency of activities was granted to the Supreme Commercial Court of Belgrade and its network of commercial courts. At the local self-government level, the award was granted to the Municipality of Smederevo.
The recipients received their awards from the Commissioner for Information of the Republic of Serbia, Mr. Rodoljub Šabić, at the ceremony held to celebrate the International Right to Know Day, observed in about one hundred countries. This meeting was an occasion to point to the new possibilities opened to the citizens and journalists under the Law, which serves as a tool for controlling the government and combating corruption. Mr. Danny Iber, representative of the CoE Secretariat General, emphasized the active role of that organization in the preparations for FOIA enactment in Serbia; both he and other participants reminded that non-governmental organizations, more than any other stakeholder, should be credited with initiating the adoption of the law.
Mr. Hans Ola Urstad, Head of OSCE Mission to Serbia, expressed unequivocal admiration for Commissioner Šabić's efforts to make the Law more than just empty words. He called on the authorities to observe the public's right to know and encouraged the citizens and journalists to use the options given to them under the Law. The participants of the meeting, including the NGO Coalition on Freedom of Access to Information, the Independent Journalists Association of Serbia, the American Bar Association (ABA/CEELI) and others, launched an initiative to introduce, as early as in the following year, an “award” for bodies ad organizations which most persistently obstructed the public's right to know.   

 29-09-2007


...................................................................................................................................

INFORMATION ON TAPPING OF CITIZENS MOST DIFFICULT TO ACCESS
Source: Blic
 Poor law implementation mechanisms
Former Ministry of Capital Investments, Ministry of Interior and the Security Information Agency have been singled out in the report by the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, Mr. Rodoljub Šabić, as institutions with the highest record of breaches of the Law on Free Access to Information in the past period.
“In general, I believe it is far more important to draw attention to the fact that mechanisms for the implementation of laws, including this Law, are not functioning. Both mechanisms, i.e. the one for implementation and the one for enforcement, are the responsibility of the Government. And yet, not in one single case has the Government enforced a decision made by the Commissioner”, said Mr. Šabić for “Blic”.
Although the number of cases with no answer is approximately one hundred, which seems very low compared with the three and a half thousand requests filed so far, Mr. Šabić explained these cases were the most delicate ones, because they were of highest interest for the public. They included a request to access information on surveillance tapping. An additional problem with the application of the Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance lies in the fact that its implementation is a responsibility of the Ministry of Culture, which, in Mr. Šabić's opinion, lacks adequate capacities. Indeed, on the basis of the 760 cases containing elements of breaches of the law which the Commissioner forwarded to the Ministry, the Ministry instituted just 15 infringement proceedings.
“There are several complementary laws that need to be enacted without further delay, including the Confidential Data Classification Law, the Personal Data Protection Law and the Law on Handling of Secret Service Files. But it is also necessary to vest another body with inspection powers over public authorities, because the Ministry of Culture lacks sufficient capacities. Control must be adequately enforced, because offenders must be made aware of their offences”, said Šabić.
He explained that the increasing caseload in 2006 indicated that the citizens are beginning to trust not only the institution of the Commissioner, but the law as well.
 

 26-09-2007


...................................................................................................................................

ŠABIĆ: GOVERNMENT STAFF NEEDS TO BE EDUCATED
Source: Danas
The Faculty of Political Science yesterday hosted a round table on media rights in Serbia
Belgrade “An average judge in Serbia will not be familiar with the European Human Rights Convention and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights” said the dean of the Private University School of Law “Union”, Mr. Vladimir Vodinelic, at yesterday's round table “New Media Law in Serbia” held at the Faculty of Political Science. He explained that, as far as the implementation of European standards and media law in Serbia was concerned, “we failed to deliver according to our actual potentials” and warned that media freedom should not lag behind the European standards.
“Media freedom is guaranteed for everyone and against everyone; it also safeguarded against any interference”, said Mr. Vodinelic. In his words, restrictions of media freedom are permissible, but “only insofar as they are legitimate, proportionate and clearly defined by the law.”
The Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, Mr. Rodoljub Šabić, said the Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance, although not free from deficiencies, nevertheless guarantees access to information on the activities of public authorities on a non-discriminatory basis.
“Serbia lacks appropriate government structures to harmonize the laws with the European standards” Mr. Šabić pointed out. He emphasized the importance of educating the staff of public authorities.
The Director of the regional program “Legal State for Southeastern Europe” implemented by the “Konrad Adenauer” Foundation, Ms Stefanie Ricarda Roos, said the freedom of thought was an indispensable pillar of a democratic order, guaranteed also in the Constitution of Serbia. She said human freedoms were at risk of being narrowed, “in particular through political decisions”, and added the law governing access to information in Germany was enacted only on the 1st of January last year, with many uncertainties as to its practical implementation still remaining.
The round table was organized by the Centre for the Advancement of Law Studies (CUPS) and the “Konrad Adenauer” Foundation.   

 26-09-2007


...................................................................................................................................

PUBLIC AUTHORITIES STILL WITHHOLDING INFORMATION
Source: Danas
Parliamentary Committee on Culture and Information endorses report by Commissioner Rodoljub Šabić
Belgrade - The Committee on Culture and Information endorsed the report by the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, Mr. Rodoljub Šabić, concerning the implementation of the Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance in the previous year.
Together with the report, the Committee also adopted Mr. Šabić's recommendations for improved implementation of the Law in the forthcoming period. At the Committee session held yesterday, Mr. Šabić said the public was becoming increasingly aware of the importance of the Law and more and more citizens were requesting information of public importance.
Apart from the fact that the Commissioner's office employed a staff of six instead of 21 and that Ministries lacked adequately qualified staff, Mr. Šabić said another problem was created by the fact that certain public institutions were still ignoring the Law.
“A law that is not backed by sanctions is not very likely to be observed”, Mr. Šabić said.
He suggested that the Government adopt an instrument designating a body or Ministry responsible for enforcing the Law on Free Access to Information of Public Importance and complying with the Commissioner's recommendations. He also explained Serbia needed laws that would clearly define state secrets and official secrets, personal data protection laws and laws governing the handling of secret service files.
At yesterday's session of the Committee, it was reported that, out of the 19 Ministries in the previous Government, only the former Ministry of Capital Investments failed to submit a report for 2006. The Republic-level Public Attorney's Office also failed to submit a report and most enterprises continued with the practice of withholding information concerning the salaries of their managers.
   

 25-09-2007


...................................................................................................................................

LEGAL CIRCUS
Source: Blic
 Comments - Rodoljub Šabić, Commissioner for Information
Although it was their duty under the law, several dozens of public authorities and public enterprises failed to comply with the orders given by the Commissioner for Information, claiming they had “taken legal action with the Supreme Court against the Commissioner”. Even a law student with the most average of grades would know such legal action is not permissible, and even if it were it would not delay enforcement, so it is rather hard to believe that institutions employing large numbers of lawyers would not be familiar with this fact. But even if they had not been aware of this, they would have learned it from the rulings of the Supreme Court, which rejected all such legal action as inadmissible. For some, even this “revelation” had little effect and they continued withholding requested information from the public. No sanctions have been imposed, and the Government, in breach of its obligations under the law, failed to enforce the decisions. As a result, some bodies even took similar inadmissible legal action in repeated identical situations.
In such repeated cases, there is obviously no room for speculations concerning any lack of knowledge on behalf of the offending bodies. “Ordinary” citizens quite understandably have misgivings in a situation in which both government authorities and public enterprises ignore their obligations and take recourse to inadmissible remedies, ostensibly and ineptly tagged “legal”, in order to trick the public into waiving their constitutional rights, while the taxpayers pay for all this conundrum. This state of affairs is worrying, because it suggests the legal order is becoming a circus without any rules that cannot be twisted or bent. The Government should all the more be on the alert, because they have not only the power, but also a responsibility to act in order to prevent such situation  

 24-09-2007


...................................................................................................................................

ŠABIĆ: SERBIA TO SCORE BETTER IN 2007 GLOBAL CORRUPTION INDEX
Source: Danas
Awaiting the publication of the perceived corruption index by Transparency International, the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, Mr. Rodoljub Šabić, articulates his disappointment over Serbia letting slip an opportunity to significantly improve its ranking this year.

On 25 September, Transparency International will publish its list of world countries ranked by perceived corruption. Last year, Serbia was tied for 90-92 with Gabon and Surinam, with a score of 3.0 on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 indicating a corruption-free society.
Mr. Šabić emphasizes Serbia's non-observance of GRECO anti-corruption recommendations as one of the lost opportunities. “This largest inter-governmental antic-corruption initiative last year gave us 25 recommendations for improving anti-corruption mechanisms, which were to be implemented by the end of this year. GRECO monitors based their recommendations and deadlines for their implementation on realistic assessments which helped them identify actions that were not only beneficial, but also acceptable and feasible. Even so, most of those recommendations have, regrettably, either not been implemented at all or have been implemented only partially”, Šabić wrote in his blog on the Argus portal: www.portalargus.org/blog.
The Commissioner pointed out that such treatment of GRECO recommendations does little to prove the sincerity of anti-corruption efforts in Serbia.
GRECO is an initiative launched within the Council of Europe and no CoE Member State, not to mention the presiding one, which Serbia is at present, can afford to disregard GRECO recommendations without undermining its own reputation. A typical example is the case of implementation of a key anti-corruption institution - the State Audit Institution. Although the law provided for this institution to be set up more than a year ago, it is still not operating, Mr. Šabić explained.
   

 20-09-2007


...................................................................................................................................

ŠABIĆ WELCOMES CALL FOR GOVERNMENT SESSIONS TO BE OPEN TO PUBLIC
Source: Danas
   - The Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, Mr. Rodoljub Šabić, said it would be advisable and beneficial for Government sessions to be open to the public.
“While taking into account all specific conditions and all organizational, logistical and other problems encountered, I strongly recommend to the Government of Serbia to make steps in that direction”, Šabić said. The portal “Skupštinska mreža” (Parliamentary Network) suggested two days ago that the Government of Serbia should open its sessions to the public and Commissioner Šabić considers this to be “a good suggestion, with benefits both for the public and for the Government itself”. He reminded that all neighbouring countries follow the practice of open Government sessions.

 18-09-2007


...................................................................................................................................

SIA IGNORING LAWS
Source: Blic
Interview - Mr. Rodoljub Šabić
Why we are not informed about the number of people watched by the security service or about the amount of SIA director's salary is a question that needs to be addressed both to the Agency itself and to the Government that condones such behaviour.
In Serbia, the public is feared by many. In my annual report to the National Assembly, I drew attention to examples of public authorities experiencing particular problems in the implementation of the Law on Free Access to Information. I singled out the Security Information Agency (SIA), as a body that has shown utter disregard for all obligations imposed on it by the law - said Mr. Rodoljub Šabić, Commissioner for Information of Public Importance, in his interview for “Blic”.
- SIA has failed to meet even the most benign of its obligations, such as submission of a Report on FOIA Implementation or publication of a Directory, which have been observed by authorities at much higher levels of power - the National Assembly, the Government, the President of the Republic and the Supreme Court.
- Are we likely to ever find out how many people were put under surveillance by the SIA and how much is Mr. Rade Bulatović, SIA director, paid?