It is natural for members of parliament to use parliamentary sessions for daily political battles and the promotion of party positions, but it is unacceptable that they do so at the expense of discussion on important topics before the Assembly, thus making it difficult for it to carry out its basic role. Citizens should have a clear idea of what is being discussed at the plenum, and not be left in the dark due to party bickering.
This is what former and current parliamentarians told "Vijesta", commenting that parliamentary Rules of Procedure are being violated during the sessions, i.e. how MPs are abusing the rights it gives them.
There are more examples - from abuse of procedural reporting, numerous replies, exceeding the time allotted for discussion... This happens at most sessions of the current convocation of the parliament, but it also happened at many previous sessions. Even in cases where the members of the assembly at the collegium of the head of the legislative chamber agree on the way of work, i.e. that they will not "creatively" interpret the Rules of Procedure and that they will stick to the topics that are on the agenda.
Although the Speaker may admonish MPs for violating the Rules of Procedure by speaking on matters not on the agenda, this rarely happens.
They forgot the basic role of the parliament
Boris Mugoša, head of the Parliamentary Club and vice-president of the Social Democrats (SD), told "Vijesti" that violating the Rules of Procedure sends a message to citizens that they do not have to follow the rules, even though they are expected to do so.
He states that things often happen at the sessions contrary to the conclusions of the collegium, which ensures and agrees on the application of the Rules of Procedure and procedures in the parliament. He assesses that the parliamentary act is violated in numerous ways, which, he adds, speaks of the level of democratic maturity of citizens' representatives.
"The institutes of procedural reports and comments, corrections of allegations, rejoinders are also being misused..." says Mugoša.
On the other hand, the former deputy with whom "Vijesti" spoke states that deviations from the Rules of Procedure are not a gross violation of that regulation, but a common thing that happens in many other parliaments, because, according to him, they are arenas that serve to promote politics, party ideologies, etc.
However, he emphasizes that it is necessary to have rules that guarantee that the Assembly will fulfill its basic role - to adopt laws, and that without a valid reason time will not be spent on party fights.
"Ultimately, the most important thing is to find a balance between the principle of parliament's efficiency and discussion on the topic, but also between what is the need and the logic of political processes in parliamentary democracies - that parliament be used to popularize political ideas," said the interlocutor.
According to the Rules of Procedure, a deputy can request a procedural report if he believes that the act has been violated. If he gets the floor, his presentation cannot last longer than (one) minute, and he is obliged to point out the provision of the Rules of Procedure that he considers to have been violated.
The head of the Assembly is obliged to, if he believes that the deputy is abusing his right, subtract that time from the total time that belongs to his club in the hearing.
When it comes to replies, the Rules of Procedure stipulate that if a deputy addresses one of his colleagues in a negative context, stating his name or function, the person to whom it refers has the right to respond. This right can be used once, for up to three minutes. "Reply to rejoinder" is not allowed, unless the speaker of the parliament judges that the statements in the rejoinder are offensive and allows a new one.
We talked about everything except VDT
That these provisions are not respected was best seen at the last session of the Assembly, held on January 27, at which the Supreme State Prosecutor (VDT) Milorad Marković was elected.
Although the members of the ruling majority said at the plenum that the collegium agreed to only discuss the topic of the agenda, without mentioning the clubs and their positions, so that the session would not be prolonged due to replies, that did not happen. The members of the assembly repeatedly repeated each other, spoke about many topics that were not on the agenda, exceeded the time given to them...
There was talk about the failure to extradite its citizen Binali Camgoz to Turkey, the "blue notebook" case, the alleged attempt to contaminate correspondence from the Sky application... As the session progressed, less and less was said about the candidates for VDT, so the discussion was reduced to daily political bickering.
Among those who did not like the agreement with the collegium, was the leader of the Citizens' Movement URA Dritan Abazović, who said that this body "cannot suspend the work of the Assembly". His request to reply to the representative of the Democratic Party of Socialists, Jevto Eraković, who, he claimed, mentioned him in a negative context, caused a "chain reaction" of replies and procedures, which lasted almost 40 minutes...
The Assembly and Mandić are silent
Boris Mugoša says that the chairman is the most agreeable to work at the sessions, and that there are ways in which deputies can be sanctioned if they "step on" the Rules of Procedure.
"The chairman should warn deputies when they speak out of order, and there are mechanisms in the Rules of Procedure when deputies can be given multiple warnings and taken away from the floor because of the way they present. Unfortunately, that rarely happens, and it's a very ugly message to citizens. It often happens that MPs don't talk about agenda items at all, and citizens don't know what was finally voted on...", he underlines.
The rules of procedure stipulate that the president is responsible for maintaining order at the session. Due to a violation of order, he can impose three measures: admonition, taking away the floor or removal from the session. A reprimand is issued to a deputy who speaks before he has requested and received the floor, in addition to the president's warning, he speaks about an issue that is not on the agenda, interrupts the speaker in his presentation or throws a line, that is, disturbs the speaker or otherwise threatens the freedom of speech...
Deprivation of the floor is imposed on a deputy who has previously been given two reprimands, and who, even after that, disrupts the order of the session or acts contrary to the provisions of the Rules of Procedure. The speaker who has been ordered to stop speaking is obliged to stop speaking. Otherwise, the head of the Assembly turns off the sound system and calls a break if necessary.
Dismissal from the session is imposed on a deputy who, even after being deprived of the floor, obstructs or prevents the work of the session, disobeys the president's decision or continues his behavior. This measure can be imposed on a deputy even without previously imposed measures, in case of disruption of order or physical attack on a deputy or another person in the Assembly building.
The Assembly and the cabinet of President Andrija Mandić did not answer "Vijesta" why the violation of the Rules of Procedure was allowed, and how its more effective application was planned.
Obligations and sanctions shall be determined by law
Nikola Mirković, Program Associate at the Center for Civic Education (CGO), believes that the Rules of Procedure can hardly correct "structural errors in parties and the format of MPs".
He told "Vijesta" that it is necessary to adopt a law on the Assembly, which, he explains, would strengthen the obligations of deputies, as well as sanctions against them, and regulate some important issues such as the control of parliamentarians "who are now outside of any system."
"Several years ago, the CGO proposed that the legal text must foresee, among other things, the obligation of a medical examination for members of parliament and employees in the administration of the Assembly, which includes special testing of mental and psychological ability, as well as initial and later regular unannounced testing on psychoactive substances. We formally sent this initiative to two working groups - those that were formed to draft the law on the Assembly, as well as to draft the law on the Government", he stated.
Asked if there is an example of the work of a parliament that Montenegro could follow, Mirković replied that there are no universal solutions, and that Montenegro should not just copy some other system, but rather explore good solutions and practices "while respecting our specificities and needs".
"The Montenegrin political scene is complex, burdened with numerous problems, but also with external influences, and not always benevolent ones, and all this has its own reflection on the functioning of the Assembly. The need to raise the political awareness and responsibility of all actors, especially political parties, as well as to improve their capacities, is increasingly evident", says the interlocutor.
How it is discussed in the European Parliament
The sessions of the European Parliament (EP), the highest legislative body of the European Union (EU), differ greatly from the sessions of the Parliament of Montenegro. MEPs generally, with a few exceptions, respect the time allowed for discussion, do not interrupt their colleagues, stick to the topic...
In the Rules of Procedure of the EP, it states that each political group in it has equal time for discussion, and that each address is limited to one minute.
MPs can use the "blue card", the opportunity to directly ask another parliamentarian a question related to his presentation. The length of the question must not exceed 30 seconds.
During the session, deputies can speak after being invited by the president. He has the authority to put an end to the excessive use of motions, when he is convinced that the purpose of this is to cause disruption of the procedures or the rights of deputies.
If the member of the EP wants to express a personal position, he can do so after the discussion on the item on the agenda.
Mirković: Many newcomers, few experienced
When asked how the work of the Assembly can be more effective, instead of reducing the discussions to political fights, Nikola Mirković answers that it primarily depends on the political will, capacity and awareness of the deputies in which direction the parliament should be positioned and what their role is.
"In the current composition, there are few MPs who can be characterized as professional politicians, and there are quite a few who have been elected for the first time. Unfortunately, in recent years they haven't really had good models to learn from, and the influence of the general wave of populism and the rather low level of political culture that we are witnessing is not negligible either. "Also, even the number of highly educated, respectable and accomplished people in their profession in various fields, which the parties accumulate on their lists and who make up parliamentary clubs, is on the decline, and in some cases even disputed", he states.
Mugoša: Citizens in the footsteps of deputies
Boris Mugoša says that part of the citizens probably use models of behavior of MPs in a certain way.
"Then how can we expect that those who should be the first to obey the rules, do not do so... What kind of message does this send to the citizens, i.e. why are we surprised by different models of citizen behavior when literally every day you see very publicly and transparently that similar the way, i.e. through similar models, the members of the Montenegrin parliament behave", he points out.
Bonus video:
