A group of civil society organizations and activists today called on members of the Parliament of Montenegro not to support the amendment by Europe Now Movement (PES) member Vasilije Čarapić to the Draft Law on Free Access to Information (FOI).
The open letter submitted by the Network for the Affirmation of the Non-Governmental Sector (MANS) states, among other things, that Čarapić is proposing a solution that denies citizens and civil society the opportunity to be an active part of the overall efforts for Montenegro to successfully close negotiation chapters 23 and 24.
Related Articles
We are publishing the full text of the open letter from a group of civil society organizations and activists to members of the Parliament regarding the Law on Free Access to Information.
"Dear Ambassadors,
We are writing to you regarding the amendment to the Bill on Free Access to Information, which was supported by the Committee on Political System, Judiciary and Administration at the proposal of PES MP Vasilije Čarapić, and which stipulates that in administrative disputes initiated due to "administration silence", each party bears its own costs.
This amendment is not a technical “ironing” of the text, but a fundamental derogation from the public’s right to access information of public importance. Free access to information is not an abstract legal norm – it is a tool without which citizens cannot protect their rights, the media cannot do their job, and civil society cannot control the government. If this tool is rendered financially meaningless, the right remains only on paper, and the fight against corruption becomes systematically meaningless.
It is particularly important to recall that the right to access information is guaranteed by the Constitution, as is the right to a legal remedy and a fair trial before an independent court. Judicial protection must be real and effective, not formal. If a rule is set according to which a citizen, journalist or organization, even when they prove a violation of their rights, must count in advance on paying their costs – then this right is in practice “charged” even when the state has indisputably made a mistake.
This introduces a financial barrier to access to court and violates the equality of parties, because the state acts as the stronger party, with a budget and resources, while the burden of fighting for legality is shifted to the individual.
It is particularly dangerous that this solution completely misses the root cause of the problem: the illegal behavior of institutions that fail to act on requests within the legal deadlines.
Instead of the law strengthening the obligation of authorities to make decisions and thus prevent obstruction, the amendment practically introduces a rule that even when a citizen, journalist or NGO proves that an authority has violated the law, they will still pay the price for that violation. This sends a message to the public: “You can sue the state, but you will also pay for it.”
This particularly affects the most vulnerable among us – people who cannot afford to pay taxes, lawyers and court costs; families struggling for social rights; people with disabilities trying to access the services they are entitled to; citizens from smaller communities seeking information about local decisions that affect their lives; victims of violence or discrimination trying to obtain evidence; and the media and organisations working in the public interest, who are already under great pressure. It is they who the law must serve most – not discourage them and force them to give up.
The proposer of the amendment, MP Vasilije Čarapić, clearly did not think about the real consequences of such a solution in practice. In a system in which “administrative silence” and procrastination have already become a common mechanism for hiding information, the abolition of cost responsibility of authorities sends the wrong signal: institutions will have an additional incentive not to respond, because they know that it costs them nothing. When “silence” has no financial consequences, it becomes the cheapest and safest way to avoid responsibility and hide documents of public interest.
Additionally, this amendment pushes citizens into an unequal battle with the state. Governments have budgets, legal services and resources at their disposal, while for an ordinary person and a small media outlet, every court case is a risk. If they know in advance that, even if they win a lawsuit due to the illegal inaction of an institution, they will have to pay their own costs – many will not even try. This is a silent but very effective ban on access to information: not through an explicit “no”, but through financial discouragement.
Moreover, such a solution would certainly not pass scrutiny before the Constitutional Court - the only question is why the proposer would even decide to intentionally harm the public's right to know, instead of fixing real problems in the application of the law and strengthening the accountability of institutions.
At a time when the state is expected to deliver measurable results in the fight against corruption, MP Čarapić proposes a solution that denies citizens and civil society the opportunity to be an active part of the overall efforts for Montenegro to successfully close negotiation chapters 23 and 24. Successful closure of these chapters is not possible without strong mechanisms of public control, availability of information, and effective judicial protection – and this amendment goes directly against that goal.
Therefore, we urge you not to support this amendment in the plenary. If we are talking about preventing abuses, the solution cannot be to punish everyone who seeks justice and information, but rather targeted measures that sanction obviously malicious requests. The blanket rule “everyone bears their own costs” is wrong, unfair and dangerous, because it rewards illegal behavior by government bodies.
"Free access to information is one of the rare mechanisms by which citizens can find out the truth about how their money is spent, how decisions are made, and who is responsible. Do not allow the amendment, seemingly "moderate", to undermine the essence of the law and send a message that institutions can remain silent with impunity," the open letter reads.
This letter was signed by the following civil society organizations and activists:
- Network for the Affirmation of the Non-Governmental Sector – MANS
- Human Rights Action - HRA
- Center for Investigative Reporting of Montenegro CIN-CG
- GREEN HOME
- Fidelity Consulting
- Aleksandar Dragićević, activist
- Nvo 35mm
- CEE Bankwatch Network
- Milica Kankaraš Berber, activist
- Danijel Garić, activist
- NGO Mogul
- Dr Martin Schneider-Jacoby Assoc. – MSJA
- NVU LBTQ woman Stana
- Mladen Ivanović, director and activist
- Expedition to Kotor
- Dina Bajramspahić, civic activist
- NGO Prima
- Youth Initiative for Human Rights
- Balkan Research Network Montenegro
- Association of Disabled Youth of Montenegro - UMHCG
- NGO Zora
- NGO Women's Safety
- NGO Poseidon
- NGO “Group of Citizens BU2”
- NGO “Association of Vasojevićs of the Coast and Boka Kotorska”
- Mediterranean News
- Vasojević's Word
- NGO "Ecological Center Delfin"
- Sinisa Nadazdin, CRINI
- Montenegrin forum (Montenegrin forum)
- NGO NADA-Herceg Novi
- Center for Bird Protection and Research - CZIP
- KOD organization
- Center for the Development of Non-Governmental Organizations - CRNVO
- RERI
- Association of young ecologists Nikšić
- Parks of the Dinarides - a network of protected areas of the Dinarides
- Women's action
- NGO "UZIP" Herceg Novi
- Civic Alliance
- NGO “Briga Me” - Podgorica
- Dr. Bojan Baća, sociologist
- NGO Montenegrin Society of Ecologists
- KANA / who if not an architect
- Media Union of Montenegro
- NGO Sparta Montenegro
- NGO Link
- NGO Environmental Program - EnvPro
- NGO Institute of Alternatives
- NGO CEGAS
- Association of Korina
- Center for Democratic Transition - CDT
- NGO Bushe
Bonus video:
