Answers to EC questionnaire criticized

The Restitution Network has expressed dissatisfaction with government’s answers to the EC questionnaire regarding the return of seized property. The organization has issued an announcement, expressing its dissatisfaction with “vague announcement that something will be done in 2011”. Answers to EC questionnaire criticized The Restitution Network has stated that “irresponsible individuals in the government managed to put their selfish personal and party interests above the interest of the state and citizens in such important documents”. The fact that work of the Directorate for Restitution of the Republic of Serbia, difficulties in the work of competent commissions for the return of agricultural land and slow return of property in de-expropriation processes, return of undeveloped construction land have not been mentioned in the answers to the questionnaire represent a “scandalous attempt to cover up basic information about restitution in Serbia”. Instead of answering a single direct question about “ambiguities in restitution” and other numerous indirect questions about funding of political parties, state property, bad privatization of state property, topics that have to do with the missing privatization through natural restitution in Serbia, the answers to the questionnaire have been created the same way the government treats its citizens, the announcement points out. “We have been facing a total disregard of the information commissioner’s demand to submit information about restitution that is important for all the citizens of Serbia,” the Restitution Network concluded. “Some answers not complete” Transparency Serbia has stated, however, that the Serbian government’s answers to the EC questionnaire regarding corruption are partially incomplete but that there are no irregularities. Transparency Serbia Program Director Nemanja Nenadic told a press conference that 38 out of 2,500 questions had directly referred to corruption, adding that there was a lack of statistical data and information on implementation of anti-corruption measures and regulations in many answers. “It is visible from the answers that the records on implementation of laws are not kept, therefore qualitative assessments of implementation of regulations are missing,” he said and stressed that more state institutions should have been involved in the process of answering some questions. When asked what answers Transparency Serbia would return to the government, Nenadic explained that all the questions that lacked information on implementation of the law required additional work.

Answers to EC questionnaire criticized

The Restitution Network has stated that “irresponsible individuals in the government managed to put their selfish personal and party interests above the interest of the state and citizens in such important documents”.

The fact that work of the Directorate for Restitution of the Republic of Serbia, difficulties in the work of competent commissions for the return of agricultural land and slow return of property in de-expropriation processes, return of undeveloped construction land have not been mentioned in the answers to the questionnaire represent a “scandalous attempt to cover up basic information about restitution in Serbia”.

Instead of answering a single direct question about “ambiguities in restitution” and other numerous indirect questions about funding of political parties, state property, bad privatization of state property, topics that have to do with the missing privatization through natural restitution in Serbia, the answers to the questionnaire have been created the same way the government treats its citizens, the announcement points out.

“We have been facing a total disregard of the information commissioner’s demand to submit information about restitution that is important for all the citizens of Serbia,” the Restitution Network concluded.

“Some answers not complete”

Transparency Serbia has stated, however, that the Serbian government’s answers to the EC questionnaire regarding corruption are partially incomplete but that there are no irregularities.

Transparency Serbia Program Director Nemanja Nenadić told a press conference that 38 out of 2,500 questions had directly referred to corruption, adding that there was a lack of statistical data and information on implementation of anti-corruption measures and regulations in many answers.

“It is visible from the answers that the records on implementation of laws are not kept, therefore qualitative assessments of implementation of regulations are missing,” he said and stressed that more state institutions should have been involved in the process of answering some questions.

When asked what answers Transparency Serbia would return to the government, Nenadić explained that all the questions that lacked information on implementation of the law required additional work.