More than a year after the new members of the Council of the Agency for Audiovisual Media Services (AMU) were due to be appointed, Montenegro has still not resolved this key step in media sector reform. While the civil society warns of political obstruction and attempts to control the media, the European Union expresses concern about the delay in the process.
In its latest non-paper (informal document), the European Commission stated that it is urgently necessary for the Parliament of Montenegro to appoint new members of the AMU Council, in order to ensure its full functioning and independence.
Under the pretext of procedural reasons, the Parliament of Montenegro rejected the proposal of civil sector representatives to the Council of the Regulatory Body, which left the body incomplete even a year after the adoption of the Law on AVMs.
The public competition for the election of two members from the NGO sector to the Regulatory Council was annulled twice, so the Regulatory Council currently has three members instead of five, as provided for by law.
Bills have been submitted to the Parliament of Montenegro seeking to restore the decisive role of the Administrative Committee of the Parliament of Montenegro. However, these proposals have not yet been put on the agenda. This move is seen by some experts as an attempt to increase political control over these institutions.
Therefore, the non-governmental organizations Media Center, Center for Investigative Reporting (CIN-CG), Human Rights Action (HRA), Media Institute of Montenegro (IMCG), Center for Civic Education (CCE), Association of Professional Journalists of Montenegro, Media Union of Montenegro and Montenegrin PEN Center, submitted information to the Head of the European Union Delegation to Montenegro, Johan Sattler, regarding the obstruction of the implementation of the Law on Audiovisual Media Services in the Parliament of Montenegro and the blockade of the work of the Agency for Audiovisual Media Services.
The current Law on AVM stipulates that a non-governmental organization may nominate a candidate for a member of the Agency Council if, in the three years prior to the publication of the public call for nominating candidates for members of the Agency Council, the annual budget for the implementation of activities in the area in which it nominates a candidate for a member of the Agency Council was not less than 3.000 euros.
An additional condition is that in the three years prior to the publication of the public call for nominations for members of the Agency Council, at least 2.000 euros were spent during one calendar year on the implementation of activities in the area in which the candidate for member is proposed. The law clearly stipulates that the Parliament must elect the candidate who has the support of the largest number of authorized nominators. This legal solution was proposed by the Working Group in order to avoid the possibility of the Parliament electing the candidate who is closest to them politically or in terms of interests, but to elect the one who has the most support. These laws received EU support and were one of the conditions for obtaining IBAR.
Goran Đurović from the Media Center believes that this is a systematic attempt at political control over independent institutions.
"In the division of control over institutions and the distribution of public functions that the parties in power consider their spoils, I believe that the Agency has gone to one of the strongest parties. This is clearly seen in the obstruction of the law and the annulment of the competition without valid reason," said Đurović.
According to him, the Speaker of the Parliament Andrija Mandić did not issue a public call for the election of Council members in September last year, even though that was his legal obligation.
"When the call was finally announced, it was quickly withdrawn, based on an initiative commissioned by an NGO close to the government. It is clear that this is a political decision by the parliamentary majority not to allow candidates who are not politically controlled to join the Agency Council," he adds.
On the other hand, a group of NGOs, including the Civic Alliance, insist on the need for, as they state, additional and stricter criteria for the selection of members of the AMU and RTCG Councils. Milan Radović from the Civic Alliance warns that the current mechanisms leave room for manipulation.
"Experience from previous processes shows that individuals have founded dozens of NGOs in one day, precisely with the aim of manipulating this criterion - and such entities could now, according to the current solution, once again use the same mechanism to their advantage," Radović states.
He adds that it is necessary to introduce mandatory public interviews and take into account the profile of the organizations proposing candidates, in order to ensure the legitimacy of the process.
"If such solutions are maintained, there is a risk that candidates without appropriate expertise and qualifications will be appointed to these extremely important positions. Therefore, we believe that the criteria for selecting members of the RTCG and AMU Councils should include the candidates' professional biographies, as well as the profile and previous work of the organizations proposing them, with mandatory public interviews," adds Radović.
He concludes that they are aware that there is no uniform practice in the European Union countries regarding the election of these bodies, but "that Montenegro must develop a model that will be inclusive, transparent and in the interest of all citizens."
Đurović, who represents 103 NGOs in the country, claims that a large part of the civil sector opposes the announcement of new amendments to the law "which would allow the majority in the Administrative Board to decide on the selection of Council members based on their political interests."
The current law stipulates that authorized nominators – NGOs, CANU, Matica Crnogorska and the Bar Association – nominate their candidates, and the Parliament confirms those with the most support.
"This procedure protects the Council from party influence, which is crucial, because the Council elects the director of the Agency and makes decisions on permits and bans on broadcasting content that spreads hatred or discrimination," explains Đurović.
For Đurović, there is no doubt "that the political ambition of the parties in power is to dominate the media sector," and that most NGOs and the European Commission have been opposing this for years.
Goran Đurović points out how important it is to ensure transparency and accountability in the process of appointing members of regulatory bodies. Without this, there is a risk that the media will remain under political control, which threatens the country's democratic processes and European integration.
"The essence is to protect the Agency Council from party influence because this is the key governing body that elects the Agency's director and decides on the content that is broadcast," Đurović points out.
Radović, on the other hand, emphasizes that existing laws must be respected and the most active NGOs must be included in decision-making. "We are not asking for anything other than the application of the law and the exclusion of political influence from the process, which must be professional and impartial," he says.
European Union: Concerns over delays
The European Commission has repeatedly expressed concern about the delays in appointing members of the AMU and RTCG Councils. It warned that such behavior casts doubt on Montenegro's commitment to media freedom and the rule of law, which could negatively affect the EU accession process.
Following pressure from Brussels, the Speaker of the Parliament issued a third public call for the election of members of the AMU Council on May 13th, and two days later for RTCG. However, the civil sector remains skeptical.
"The message from the European Commission was clear enough - if the obstructions continue, Montenegro will not be able to close even a minimum of the planned chapters," concludes Đurović.
This text was made with the financial support of the National Endowment for Democracy. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and publishers of the Media Institute of Montenegro and does not necessarily reflect the views of the donors.
The text was downloaded from the website of the Media Institute.
Bonus video:
