CURRENT LOCAL TIME
Background Check Group
+6531 290 390
Email: info@backcheckgroup.com
Background Check Group
Global Reach Local Insight Headquartered in Singapore serve clients in more than 200 countries
A signed agreement on cooperation between Montenegro and the European Judicial Cooperation Unit
Delegation of Montenegro and the European Judicial Cooperation Unit – Eurojust initialed today in the Hague Agreement of Cooperation.
Initialing the preceding review and approval of the draft text of the Agreement which are operated Montenegrin delegation led by Director of the Directorate for International Legal Cooperation and European Integration at the Ministry of Justice Svetlana Rajkovic , and Eurojus-delegation headed by the chief of the Department for External Cooperation Eurojust Malči Gabrijelčič . They will be followed by the official signing of this for Montenegro is extremely significant Agreement.
In addition Rajkovic , the Montenegrin delegation consisted of the Head of the Directorate for International Legal Assistance in the Ministry of Justice Snezana Maras , deputy senior prosecutor Veljko Rutović , a member of the Council of the Agency for protection of personal data and the free access to information Aleksa Ivanovic , and Head of Personal Data Protection in the Ministry Internal Affairs Zora Čizmović .
– Agreement on cooperation between Montenegro and Eurojust, which was initialed today is defined by the extent of cooperation between Montenegro and the European body established by the competent authorities to implement the agreement, such as setting up the State Prosecutor’s liaison with Eurojust, person contacts with Eurojust, clearly identify the moralities of exchange of information between Montenegro and Eurojust, with special emphasis on the issues of privacy and personal data protection and data security. The agreement improves cooperation in the field of justice and law enforcement with the Member States of the European Union and other countries that have concluded similar agreements with Eurojust. The establishment of a contractual relationship enhances the integration of Montenegro into the institutional structure of the European Union, and facilitates preparation of Montenegrin institutions for the functioning of the European institutional system to take responsibility after full membership in the European Union – said in a statement.
Representatives of Eurojust during the past two years several times visited Montenegro in order to assess the current situation and the implementation of the recommendations as part of activities aimed at signing of the Agreement on cooperation between Montenegro and the European institutions, where they had meetings with representatives of the Ministry of Justice, the Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office Agency for protection of personal data and the free access to information as well as representatives of judicial authorities, about the implementation of the recommendations of Eurojust in the field of data protection and international cooperation in criminal matters. After the visit in October 2014, stated that all recommendations Eurojust considered and fully implemented in practice, which is a very positive step, especially if you take into account the fact that the Montenegrin institutions fulfilled all the recommendations for a period of less than a year.
Eurojust is an agency of the European Union’s Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters was created in 2002, with participation by representatives of the Member States of the European Union.Union. Eurojust was established with the aim of increasing the effectiveness of cooperation and coordination between the competent authorities of the Member States of the European Union in the conduct of the investigation and prosecution of serious cross-border and organized crime, as well as to improve methods of providing more complex forms of international legal assistance in criminal matters and to speed up the extradition process.
In Tivat held a public hearing on the application of the Law on Free Access to Information
OSCE Mission to Montenegro, in cooperation with the Agency for protection of personal data and the free access to information, organized today in Tivat public debate on free access to information, which is media partner Radio Tivat.
Proactive disclosure of information of public importance and odeđivanje Agency to be a second-instance authority in decision-making, are the latest innovations brought by the new Law on Free Access to Information, which came into force two years ago, said Aleksa Ivanovic, a member of the group that participated in the making Law and member of the Agency. He stressed that the work of the Agency and the spirit of the law summarized in the message – citizens have a right to know. “All jurisdiction in the second instance data independent institution. Whoever that apply if the appeal against the decision on an application submitted has to come with us to the Agency. We are so bitten a big chunk that is reflected in the fact that we are only for the last year had 1,700 cases, “said Ivanovic.
The new president of the Agency Council Đokaj Muhammad said that the new Regulation has an important legal instrument in the fight for a more open society and the fight against corruption and nepotism. He stressed that the most important problem faced by frivolity and understanding that will contribute to better practice the work of the Administrative Inspectorate shall investigate the organs that do not provide information in a spirit of proactive approach. “The new Council, a new approach to the story, which is called free access to information. If fully implement this law, we will have a more open and transparent society. It is a good prerequisite for the fight against corruption and other anomalies that plague our society, “said Đokaj.
OSCE Representative, Oksana Poljuga pointed out that the public debate in Tivat other organized in Montenegro and that the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Montenegro, organized 25 seminars and dedicated to this area. Poljuga stressed that the information belongs to the public, not the state institutions.
The Chief Administrator of the Municipality of Tivat, Jovanka Laličić said that Tivat was not randomly chosen to hold a public debate on free access to information because it is recognized as an example of good governance and transparency. She stressed that all relevant information and documents on the work of the municipality published on the official website where he highlighted a special banner with the instruction on access to information. “We are proud that all requests for access to information that is in 2014 was 126, solved within. This number of applications was only one complaint, “said Laličić.
Coordinator of the legal program MANS, Vuk Jankovic pointed out that the NGO for 10 years filed 75,000 requests for access to information, and are of February, 2013, when the new law came into force filed 20,000. He said that a good part of the requests, 2,400 relates to the silence of the administration and that the new law effectively obzirodm being sent appeals filed by citizens. “In 7,000 cases allowed us access to information, in 5000 was rejected because the organs were not in possession of the documents, and for 300 cases the request was denied because it was related to expenditure in the municipal and state budgets,” said Jankovic, adding that MANS lately focused on cash grants during the electoral process, in particular social payments, which represent taxpayers’ money.
Biljana Bozic, Head of Department for Information in the Agency pointed out that the largest number of applications received from non-governmental sector in 4058 led by the MANS, follow the requirements of journalists, and that has demonstrated interest of the citizens who have filed close to 600 applications.
The discussion was attended by representatives Tivatske anticorruption actions, Alternative Creative Center, Radio Tivat, committee member Vlado Arsic and municipal Secretariat for Information Systems and Administrative Services.
As highlighted worrying that over 2 years, and despite the large number of requests any case is not sanctioned, but the agency hopes that such a practice can quickly be changed.
(“Official Gazette of the Republic of Montenegro ” no. 70/2003, and Correction, no. 13/2004)
CHAPTER THIRTY FOUR
CRIMINAL OFFENCES AGAINST OFFICIAL DUTY
Abuse of official status
Article 416
(1) A person acting in an official capacity who with the intention of providing a gain for himself or another or causing damage to another uses his official status or authority, exceeds the limits of his authority or fails to do his official duty, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years.
(2) If acts referred to in Paragraph 1 of this Article have caused significant violation of rights of another or have been used to acquire an illicit material gain or have caused considerable damage, the offender shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of three months to five years.
(3) If the value of acquired illicit material gain exceeds the amount of € 3.000, the offender shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of one year to eight years.
(4) If the value of acquired illicit material gain exceeds the amount of € 30.000, the offender shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of two to ten years.
(5) A person in charge of a company, institution or other organization who commits offences referred to in Paragraphs 1 to 4 of this Article, shall be liable to a punishment prescribed for such offences.
Unconscientious performance of office
Article 417
(1) An official who by violation of law or other regulations or general enactments, by failure to do supervision or in some other manner obviously unconscientiously acts in the performance of his/her office, although he was aware or had the duty and had to be aware that such acts may cause serious violation of rights of another or damage to property of another, when such a violation or damage exceeding the amount of € 3.000 actually takes place, shall be liable to a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years.
(2) If acts referred to in Paragraph 1 of this Article have caused serious violation of rights of another or property damage exceeding the amount of € 30.000, the offender shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of six months to five years.
(3) A responsible person in an institution or other organization, with the exception of those engaged in a business activity, who commits offences referred to in Paragraphs 1 to 2 of this Article shall be liable to a punishment prescribed for such an offence.
Unlawful collection and payment
Article 418
An official who collects money from another who is not obliged to pay or charges another more than s/he has to pay, or who when paying another or handing over to another pays or hands over less that he is obliged to, shall be liable to a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years.
Fraud in service
Article 419
(1) An official who during in the performance of his service and with the intention of acquiring for himself or another an illicit material gain by submitting false statements of account or in some other way deceits an authorized person to make unlawful payment, shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of six months to five years.
(2) If an illicit material gain acquired as a result of an offence referred to in Paragraph 1 of this Article exceeds the amount of € 3.000, the offender shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year to eight years.
(3) If an illicit material gain acquired as a result of an offence referred to in Paragraph 1 of this Article exceeds the amount of € 30.000, the offender shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of two to ten years.
(4) A responsible person in a company, institution or other organization, who commits offences referred to in Paragraphs 1 to 3 of this Article shall be liable to a punishment prescribed for such an offence.
Embezzlement
Article 420
(1) A person who, with the intention of acquiring illicit material gain for himself/herself or another, appropriates money, securities or other movable things entrusted to him by virtue of his office or under the terms of his position in a state authority, company, institution or other organization or store, shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of six months to five years.
(2) If illicit material gain acquired as a result of an offence referred to in Paragraph 1 of this Article exceeds the amount of € 3.000, the offender shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one to eight years.
(3) If illicit material gain acquired as a result of an offence referred to in Paragraph 1 of this Article exceeds the amount of € 30.000, the offender shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of two to ten years.
Unauthorized use
Article 421
A person who makes an unauthorized use of money, securities or other movables entrusted to him by virtue of his office or under terms of his position in a state authority, company, institution, or other organization or store or without authorization confers such things to another for use, shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of three months to five years.
Illegal mediation
Article 422
(1) Anyone who accepts a reward or any other benefit for using his official or social position to intercede that an official act be or not be performed, shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of three months to three years.
(2) Anyone who by using his official or social position or influence, intercedes that an official act be performed that should not be performed or that an official act that must be performed, shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of six months to five years.
(3) If a reward or any other benefit has been received for influence referred to in Paragraph 2 of this Article, the offender shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one to eight years.
(4) Illicit reward and property gain shall be seized.
Passive bribery
Article 423
(1) A person acting in an official capacity who requests or receives a gift or any other benefit, or who accepts a promise of gift or any benefit for himself/herself or another for agreeing to perform within the scope of his/her official powers an act he should not perform, or not perform an official act which he should perform, shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of two to twelve years.
(2) A person acting in an official capacity who request or receives a gift or other benefit or who accepts a promise of gift or any other benefit for himself/herself or another for agreeing to perform within the scope of his/her official powers an official act he must perform, or not perform an official act he should otherwise not perform, shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of two to eight years.
(3) A person acting in an official capacity who commits a criminal offence referred to in Paragraphs 1 or 2 of this Article in relation to detection of a criminal offence, initiating or conducting a criminal procedure, pronouncement or enforcement of a criminal sanction, shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of three to fifteen years.
(4) An official who requests or accepts a gift or other benefit after having performed or omitted to perform an official act referred to in Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of this Article or in relation with it, shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of three months to three years.
(5) A foreign official who commits an offence referred to in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 of this Article, shall be liable to a punishment prescribed for such an offence.
(6) A person in charge of a business organization, institution or other organization who commits an offence referred to in Paragraphs 1, 2 and 4 of this Article, shall be liable to a punishment prescribed for such an offence.
(7) Accepted gift or property gain shall be seized.
Active bribery
Article 424
(1) Anyone who gives or promises a gift or other gain to an official who agrees to perform an official act within his/her official powers that he ought not to perform or to omit to perform an official act he ought to perform, or a person who mediates in bribery of an official, shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of six months to five years.
(2) Anyone who gives or promises a gift or other gain to an official who agrees to perform an official act within his/her official powers that he is obliged to perform or to omit to perform an official act he must not perform or who mediates in such a bribery of an official, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years.
(3) Provisions of Paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article shall also be in effect when bribe was given or promised to a foreign official person.
(4) The offender referred to in Paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article who had reported the criminal offence before he found out that the crime was detected, can be acquitted from punishment.
(5) Provisions of Paragraphs 1, 2 and 4 of this Article shall be also in effect when bribe was given or promised to a person in charge of a company, institution or other organization.
(6) A gift or other benefit seized from a person who has received a bribe can be returned to the person giving the bribe under conditions referred to in Paragraph 4 of this Article.
Disclosure of official secrets
Article 425
(1) An official who without authorization communicates, conveys or makes available in some other way to another information constituting an official secret, or who obtains such information with the intention of conveying it to an unauthorized person, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of three months to five years.
(2) If an offence referred to in Paragraph 1 of this Article has been committed out of greed in respect of particularly confidential information or for the purpose of its disclosure or use abroad, the offender shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of one to eight years.
(3) If an offence referred to in Paragraph 1 of this Article has been committed by negligence, the offender shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years.
(4) An official secret shall be understood to mean information or documents that, under law, other regulation or a decision of a competent authority passed in conformity with law, have been proclaimed an official secret whose disclosure would result or could result in detrimental consequences to the office.
(5) Provisions referred to in Paragraphs 1 to 4 of this Article shall also be applied to a person who has disclosed an official secret after his position of an official ceased.
Who can apply?
Individuals must apply directly in person only.
• Third party representatives not favoured.
• Embassy/Consulate will not accept applications.
Where?
• Individuals must apply to their local municipal’s police station.
• In rare circumstances, third party applicants may apply. Consult local police station for more information.
What must the applicant supply?
• ID card
What are the costs / turnaround times?
• Fee: €5 (approx. GBP£ 4.00)
• Must be paid to local police station; consult police station for fees, bank details and turnaround time.
Contact Details
For more information, consult local municipal police station or:
Ministry of Interior Affairs and Public Administration
Bulevar Svetog Petra Cetinjskog 22
Podgorica
Tel: (+382) 202 415 90
Email: mupravno@cg.yu
Embassy of Montenegro
18 Callcott Street W8 7SU
Tel: 020 7727 6007
Fax: 020 7243 9358
Email: UnitedKingdom@mfa.gov.me
| Budget Autonomy | No |
|---|---|
| Annual Budget of the Agency | EUR 325,441 |
| Per Capital Expenditure | $0.81 (2010) |
| Expeniture as % of the GDP | 0.008% (2010) |
| Are employees protected by law from recrimination or other negative consequences when reporting corruption (i.e. whistle-blowing)? | Yes |
| Does your country have freedom of information legislation? | Yes |
| Does your country have conflict of interest legislation? | Yes |
| Does your country have a financial disclosure system to help prevent conflicts of interest? | Yes |
| Who appoints the head of your agency? | The head is selected through public competition procedure, upon which it has been nominated by Minister of Justice and finally approved by the Government of Montenegro. |
| Who has the authority to remove the head of the ACA? | The Government of Montenegro upon the proposal of the Minister of Justice has the authority to remove the head of DACI. |
| Is there any term limit for the head of the ACA? | Yes , 5 years mandate |
| Does your agency measure performance? | Yes Percentage of total budget allocated to outreach activities and communication Other, please specify Key performance indicators are set out for every activity in the yearly Action Plan |
| Full access to Government | Yes |
|---|
| Cocaine Price | $111.2 per gram |
|---|---|
| Ecstasy Price | $41.7 per gram |
| Heroin Price | $23.6 per gram |
| Marijuana Price | $7.0 per gram |
| Counterfeiting | $0.007 Billion ($7 Million) |
| Software Piracy | $7 Million |
| Total Country Black Market Value | $0.007 Billion ($7 Million) |
| Calendar | GMT | Reference | Actual | Previous | Consensus | Forecast |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014-09-25 | 09:55 AM | Q2 | 0.3% | 1.5% (R) | 6.99% | |
| 2014-12-26 | 10:00 AM | Q3 | 1.3% | 0.3% | 1.09% | |
| 2015-04-29 | 10:45 AM | Q4 | 2.6% | 1.4% (R) | 1.4% | |
| 2015-06-26 | 11:00 AM | Q1 | 2.6% | -2.08% | ||
| 2015-09-25 | 09:55 AM | Q2 | -3.45% | |||
| 2015-12-25 | 10:00 AM | Q3 | -4.09% |
Translate »
We will not leak your personal information