Urgency is an excuse for non-transparency: Government telephone sessions should be the exception, but they have become the rule

Telephone sessions are organized when there is a reason for urgency, and for certain issues, and anything that is not urgent can wait for a regular session, said former Secretary General of the Government Boris Marić.

Electronic sessions generally eliminate discussion, reduce the space for documentation analysis and prevent clarifications, which further complicates responsible decision-making, says Nikola Obradović (CCE)

88568 views 92 reactions 21 comment(s)
No answer as to why decisions are made in electronic/telephone sessions: from the Government session, Photo: Djordje Cmiljanic/gov.me
No answer as to why decisions are made in electronic/telephone sessions: from the Government session, Photo: Djordje Cmiljanic/gov.me
Disclaimer: The translations are mostly done through AI translator and might not be 100% accurate.

Telephone and electronic sessions of the Government, which should be an exception for urgent and technical issues, have become the rule, thereby violating the principles of transparency, accountability, quality of decision-making and democratic governance.

This was assessed by the interlocutors of "Vijesti", commenting on the increasingly frequent practice of making strategically important decisions via telephone sessions of the Government of Montenegro.

The government has made several important decisions in electronic and telephone sessions this month alone, including extending the term of office of the acting director of the Police Administration, Lazar Šćepanović, and appointing Ivica Janović as the full-time director of the National Security Agency (ANB). It has also adopted a decision to impose sanctions against Belarus, amend the statute of the Regional Diving Center, and decided to hold a thematic session on the granting of concessions for the Podgorica and Tivat airports.

Marić: The quality of decision-making is being undermined

Lawyer and former Secretary General of the Government Boris Marić assessed that the excessive number of telephone sessions and the making of decisions that are not urgent violate the principles of effectiveness, expediency and quality of decision-making.

He explained that the Government has its own procedures, primarily determined by acts of the Government itself, or regulations.

"These acts elaborate quite well the working methods and procedures for reaching decisions of the Government. The Government primarily implements the procedure for preparing an act for decision-making and later implementing adopted decisions through the work of ministries and other administrative bodies," explained Marić.

He pointed out that the bulk of the preparation and control of material prepared for the Government takes place in working bodies, or rather, committees.

"Due to the heterogeneity of the authorities, the committees are often unable to fully discuss certain issues, so it often happens that certain controversial issues end up in the Government in, conditionally speaking, raw material. This is then an occasion to open a debate in the Government that takes on the character of a parliamentary debate, and that should not, as a rule, be the character of work at a Government session," Marić pointed out.

He assessed that telephone sessions were an exception.

"They are organized when there is a reason for urgency and for individual issues. Anything that is not urgent can wait for a regular government session," says Marić.

Telephone sessions should be an exception: Marić
Telephone sessions should be an exception: Marićphoto: Savo Prelevic

Nikola Obradović, a program associate at the Center for Civic Education (CCE), agrees that the practice of making key decisions through electronic, or telephone, Government sessions seriously violates the principles of transparency, accountability, and democratic governance.

He pointed out that what was supposed to be an exception - for technical issues, emergencies or extraordinary circumstances, has become the rule.

"According to data from the Center for Civic Education, as many as 58 percent of the sessions of the 44th Government in the first 15 months of its mandate were held electronically. Decisions on personnel issues, legislation, the security sector, education, and even key economic and environmental topics are made with a click, often at night or on weekends, via messages in phone applications," Obradović pointed out.

He assessed that such a practice derogates from the institutional culture of dialogue, the transparency of the process, and the obligation to explain decisions.

Electronic sessions, he said, generally eliminate discussion, reduce the space for documentation analysis, and prevent clarifications, which further complicates responsible decision-making.

"All of this creates the impression that either the government is not taking its job seriously, or that someone is systematically maintaining a sense of a state of emergency. In both cases, it is an alarm for the quality of governance that everyone should think about, and that is why we have opened this topic and appreciate that some media outlets recognize its importance," Obradović said.

The impression is created that the Government is not taking the job seriously: Obradović
The impression is created that the Government is not taking the job seriously: Obradovićphoto: CGO

Government without answers

The Government did not respond to "Vijesti's" questions about the criteria used to decide whether a certain decision should be made via telephone session rather than at a regular one, how the Government ensures transparency and legality in the decision-making process via telephone sessions, and whether all of these sessions are documented and publicly available.

There was no response to the questions of whether the Government had consulted legal experts or institutions on the constitutionality of decision-making on strategic and security issues via Viber/WhatsApp communication, nor to how they were responding to claims from the civil sector that this practice renders institutional order and democratic procedures meaningless.

Obradović assessed that the dominance of electronic sessions seriously undermines institutional accountability and public control, which are the foundations of every democratic system.

"Namely, when most decisions are made outside the formal institutional framework, a closed circle of decision-making is created without transparency, without debate and without real control. In addition, this rightly raises doubts about the motives and intentions of those who manage the system in this way."

He pointed out that in such an environment, there is no meaningful discussion, no trace of the positions expressed remains, and the level of responsibility for the consequences is dangerously lowered. "The consequence of this is an additional erosion of trust in institutions and the credibility of the Government itself."

"Negative consequences already visible"

According to data from the website of the Government of Montenegro, from January to June 2025, significant decisions in various areas were made at numerous electronic and telephone sessions.

In January, the Government adopted the Information on the initiation of the procedure for the employment of 815 police officers at an electronic session. In early February, at a telephone session, the Proposal for a Law on Amendments to the Law on the Prevention of Money Laundering and Financing of Terrorism, as well as the Proposal for Amendments to the Budget for 2025, were adopted.

A few days later, it was decided to begin negotiations with the Government of Japan on a grant for the improvement of the Music Center of Montenegro, a change to the agenda of the Assembly of the "Dr Simo Milošević" Institute in Igalo was considered, and a proposal was made for the election of a member of the Board of Directors of that institute.

On February 15, the government adopted amendments to the decision on leasing parts of the coastal zone, and on March 21, Mladen Mikijelj was appointed director of the Public Company for Coastal Zone Management.

An amendment to the conclusion regarding negotiations with the United Arab Emirates on cooperation in the field of tourism and real estate was adopted on March 28, and on April 15, the Government adopted legislative proposals on amendments to the laws on the Judicial Council and Judges, the State Prosecutor's Office, the organization of state administration, as well as amending the decision on state secretaries.

On the last day of April, international sanctions were imposed due to the annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol, memorandums of cooperation were signed with Egypt, and decisions were made to lease the coast for the construction of new beaches.

On May 20, the government adopted a set of measures against Russia in connection with the war in Ukraine, as well as amendments to the law on the recognition of foreign educational documents.

Responding to the question of whether deciding on key security and judicial issues "remotely" could have negative consequences for the rule of law and the democratic order of Montenegro, Obradović said that the negative consequences are already visible.

"This is not only indicated by critical voices in the country, but also by relevant EU documents. In the last few weeks, an extremely critical non-paper of the European Commission on the rule of law and a European Parliament resolution have been published. It is clear that Brussels is also losing patience with this government practice, at a time when space is open for an accelerated EU path. The damage that the government could cause with its irresponsible approach, if it continues like this, would be long-term and incalculable," Obradović assessed.

He emphasized that it is now crucial to demonstrate a functional rule of law, the strength of institutions, and security in society:

"And this is not done by making decisions about appointments to the ANB, the police or the prosecutor's office via nightly phone messages, not to mention many other problematic aspects..."

Obradović pointed out that in the context of European integration, this decision-making model sends the wrong message to the EU, i.e. "it shows that the top brass do not understand, or deliberately trample on, the standards regarding transparency, accountability and institutional integrity, which are key components of negotiation chapters 23 and 24."

Solution in the Law on Government

Obradović said that the issue of electronic sessions should finally be addressed in the long-awaited and much-needed Law on Government.

"Unfortunately, the publicly available versions of the draft so far do not recognize this need, and numerous recommendations from the civil sector and the wider public appear to have been ignored. This misses an important opportunity to clearly regulate and control some democratically problematic practices, such as frequent "remote" decision-making," he pointed out.

Obradović said that the Law on Government should define precise conditions under which electronic sessions can be held, what types of decisions can be made at them, as well as rules on transparency, including the obligation to publish minutes, the availability of the agenda and limiting the number of secret items, both at these and regular sessions.

"I hope that there is still room to influence the essence through amendment interventions to the proposed Law on Government and introduce mechanisms that will prevent the abuse of this institute. That would be an important step towards strengthening democratic control over the executive branch," Obradović said.

Bonus video: